₦airaland Forum

Ihedinobi: Na im be say na you go tell us how many Law God come get na, no be so? So what's the difference between the one written on the hearts of unbelievers and the one given to the Israelites?

The one written on the heart cannot be listed, compare to the one given to the Israelites. That one dey for book with page numbers and there is a total if you decide to count

Ihedinobi: Honestly, one of us is confused and I can't swear that it's me. If ten are now in two, isn't that the same as saying that ten were compressed to two?

i know my maths is not so good, but your calculation cannot be correct. work this out; take ten oranges and throw them (in equal proportion) into two large basket already loaded with over a thousand oranges, then count to see if it's the ten oranges that was compressed to become two basket of oranges. confused? you should be take this as your homework. see me for the answer tomorrow

Ihedinobi: Plus wouldn't that mean that the two = the ten

Is it possible for the two basket above to be equal to 10 oranges, what happened to the over a thousand oranges already in the basket?

Ihedinobi: Plus wouldn't that mean that the two = the ten meaning that saying that one doesn't need the ten anymore is equivalent to saying that one doesn't need the two either?

To illustrate, let assume you at some point in time used to visit a car rental company to rent a car. Now there are 10 different brand of car available to you, each takes you to specific destination and you have to drive yaself. You use and return at the end of the day to the car rental company. Now you got a new job and ya new boss load your empty garage with over 60 brands of cars. included in this 60 is the 10 that you normally pick from the rental company. Now this brand new cars comes programed with your destination and drive on auto pilot. so tell me why visit the rental company after receiving such lovely gift from your new boss? and you get to park the cars in your garage. tell me if you are not loving the new arrangement. Please note you have two garage and each garage can take 30 cars. So you can see not needing the ten you used to rent does not equate to not needing your garage.

Ihedinobi: So you're saying that it's the same Law that unbelievers are judged by?

How many law God get? The difference is that the one written on the heart of unbelievers is not the same as one given to the Israelite. It's like God giving me a toyota camry and also giving you one. we have different licence plate, your own run on diesel while mine is on petrol, list of options might vary.

Ihedinobi: ^^ Ten compressed into two and Zikky says that that means that the ten have vanished and shouldn't be seen anymore. Are we coming full circle or what?

No, not 10 compressed to 2, more like 10 (9) inside 2.

Ihedinobi: Zikky says that that means that the ten have vanished and shouldn't be seen anymore. Are we coming full circle or what?

sorry to say but you guys respond like robots. i did not say the 10 vanished, all i said was you don't need the 10. As long as you continue to see the 10, you are no different from the Israelite.

Ihedinobi: Blatant dishonesty.

Lol! you don't disappoint. was not expecting anything better.

Alwaystrue: @ZIkky,
I really have nothing much to say regarding this again as I have proven with scriptures. I told you to go and see the laws/commands God gave the Israelites by Himself (because you claimed I make everything sound like the law of Moses). So I gave you proof of what I had been explaining to you were the laws direct from God, in His own voice, direct to the Israelites because I decided to explain it as basic as it could be, yet you still did not understand.

If you ever taken time to read my post, you will see that we were saying the same thing. you said the laws/command to the Israelite is from God and i sated that you make everything sound like the law God called gave to the Israelite through Moses (a.k.a the mossaic law). i don't see any area of disagreement here. Referring me to Exodus when we don't disagree on the source of the Law is something i don't understand. My main concern was how this translate to something Christians should follow? i know and agree it was from God, but my understanding is that it was for a purpose specifically for the Jews. That is not to say it is not valid law of God.

Alwaystrue: Do you love God, do you bear false witness now, do you covet or commit adultery because you are under grace?
The sacrifice expected of us now is a living sacrifice of our entire beings which is our reasonable service. It means our all and you can relate that to the altar of earth as we are but earth.

No problem, i don't disagree.

Alwaystrue: Lastly, I asked you to show us the law of God to the unbelievers. You showed scripture on God demands the same requirements of the law from the gentiles....please name those laws, that was my question....that was what I was asking for and provide it with scripture? Stop saying law, law and not saying what you mean. List those laws.
And for someone who can see beyond arguement, you have confirmed exactly what we have beensaying all along. I hope this your fear of the 'Law' will not lead to something else.

Name the law: God's law.

You want me to list God's law? you see, this is one area we differ. My sister, please how do you quantify love? i can't do that. maybe you can help me. I understand God's law to be a reflection of God's nature/character. How do i list this? Is the 10 commandment all of God's nature? i really don't know where to start. that was the reason i asked if love is fulfilling just 10 human activities or possibly thousands/millions of activities.

My position is this: If i have Christ, i should not be looking at a list of laws. My actions should come naturally. i don't need to pause to consider what the written law says before i do anything. That's one reason the Law in Exodus cannot be for you. The more you think of the 10 commandment, the more your responses becomes one of legal obligation. So my sister am not lawless, it just that the written (moral) law is not what drives my action. though in the course of obeying Christ commandment (to love) i do things you find in the written law.

Alwaystrue: Is the 10 commandments, 10 Human activities? You see you have clearly shown in @ Corinthains 3:16. When the bible says Love fulfils the law....Zikky says it is not so.

do you have to make false accusations before answering my question? all i did was asked if you see more than the 10 commandment. my question is not saying the love does not fulfils the law.

Alwaystrue: DO you know what loving God alone means? If you take that alone, you will see all what it entails. You keep seeing 10, but I see more than that because I do not read the law with veiled eyes.
When the fruits of the spirit is mentioned, and Love is the first, do you think someone who loves God will not have Joy, patience in His will, longsuffering because they see the bigger picture through Christ, self-control as he knows life is just mundane.

@bolded, this what i expect you to do instead of the false accusations. You take an offensive stance and read wrong meanings into my posts. It's easier for you to ask if am of the opinion love does not fulfil the law.

Alwaystrue: If a pagan had said this to me, I would have understood but from a Christian?
When Jesus explain this and summed it all to 2 commandments, Zikky says it is not meant for Christians. Read I John 5:2-3, Rev. 22:14, Revelations 12:17....the dragons are beginning to show themselves. Pray tell me which commandment(S), God meant in those scriptures? And they were plural...

you sound like the impatient type, don't spend time to really digest what you read before arriving at a conclusion.

Alwaystrue: If a pagan had said this to me, I would have understood but from a Christian?
When Jesus explain this and summed it all to 2 commandments, Zikky says it is not meant for Christians. Read I John 5:2-3, Rev. 22:14, Revelations 12:17....the dragons are beginning to show themselves. Pray tell me which commandment(S), God meant in those scriptures? And they were plural...

I don't remember ever saying the law is not summed up to 2 commandments. my point is this; if you have Christ, you will be seeing 2 commandments instead of 10. if you want to be like Christ the 2 commandment is the way forward.

Alwaystrue: Ihedinobi asked what the natural/God's law to the unbeliever is, please show us in scripture?

Paul says the gentiles that knows nothing about Gods the Law can do by nature/instinct the stuff contained in God's Law. My understanding of that is that even unbelievers knows the moral law of God (and according to Paul written on their hearts) and God gave also gave them a conscience to examine them. Our forefathers did not know the law, yet they had a sense of justice, right and wrong. they do by nature things you find in the Law.

Romans 2:14-16 (NIV)
14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.)


The sad part is even unbelievers who don't have the spirit still follows that written on their heart, my Christians brothers and sisters will ignore the spirit that suppose to guide them and go flipping through pages of the mosaic law before they know what action to take

Alwaystrue: What brought about my question to you?
Does your quote below sound familiar?

Did I not ask you to check out the commandments there to see if it was Moses who said it or GOD ALMIGHTY HIMSELF? Your dishonsty is amazing. Ihedinobi asked what the natural/God's law to the unbeliever is, please show us in scripture?

this was my quote:

Zikkyy: Who told you they have no law. Not being subject to the mosaic law does not make you lawless. I guess that's your problem. you think everything revolves round the mosaic law.

So Alwaystrue, please answer your name; point to the part in my post above that says the mosaic law is not from God, please You are accusing me of dishonesty please show how have been dishonest. if you can't find it, please ensure you issue an apology

Alwaystrue: Do confirm if that was part of the instructions given by God as he thundered from heaven to the Israelites. You are just dodging the subject. Did he mention eye for eye, and burnt offerings there in what I told you to read? And do you understand PENALTY FOR SIN and work of Jesus on the Cross to take it away? I expect questions like this from unbelievers, frankly.

at bolded, i don't know the bible you use o! but i saw burnt offering in chapter 20 (you told me to read exodus 19&20).....

Exodus 20:24 (NIV)
24 “‘Make an altar of earth for me and sacrifice on it your burnt offerings and fellowship offerings, your sheep and goats and your cattle. Wherever I cause my name to be honored, I will come to you and bless you.

....and i don't know why you decide to stop at chapter 20, the instruction got to chapter 24:8 where the agreement was signed/executed. you don't take a portion that appears to serve your purpose and abandon the rest, it was one package including the law of eye for an eye and burnt offering. If truly that instruction was for you, you should be burning cows and goat on the pulpit, abi na?

Alwaystrue: Sorry go back and read the ministry of death that you talked about. The 10 commandments I told you off was spoken byGod directly and verbally but every single one of you cannot check it , possibly out of fear. Yes love doesn't work in isolation. You WILL and DO through Jesus Christ the love or do you just confess it. It is that lover that fulfils the law. Nothing sinister except those whose heart are nit right will see that bible verse as such.

Alwayatrue, if we are to breakdown the law of God, do you think we will arrive at 10 items only, or let me ask, is love fulfilling just 10 human activities or possibly thousands/millions of activities we can undertake?do you think the 10 commandment covers every possible human action? If it does not, then that's not the law love is fulfilling.

Alwaystrue: For the willing to learn, read Exodus 19-20 and Deuteronomy chapter 4-5 and see what God commanded for the first time face to face, and the only time (to the whole body of the israelites...i stand to be corrected) verbally to the Israelites.

If God commanded face to face, is that justification or proof that the instruction is for Christians?

Alwaystrue: Yes, you can start your bible reading from the book of Romans then since God was only speaking to the ISRAELITES. Intact do confirm if the whole bible was even addressed to you, afterall Zikky was not mentioned.

Too late. Have already done Genesis to Revelation. When I say the instruction was for the Israelites, I meant it was for them to implement. Are you saying you do an eye for eye?abi you offer burnt offering to the Lord? These are part of the instruction in Exodus.It is not stated anywhere that Christians should implement the instruction, so why say its for me?

Alwaystrue: @Zikky,
No, you won't read Exodus because then you will realise the folly of those arguing for lawlessness. I have raised this continually and everyone has dodged so far because then the truth stares them in the face.

Na wa for you! Even when I told you am not arguing that the instruction is not from God, you still come up with statement like the one above? Why read exodus when I agree the instruction is from God? Please tell me! You like to interpret my post to suit your agenda

shdemidemi: Gentiles had no law, all they had was conscience and the imputed sin inherited by the transgression of Adam. Conscience was never enough to justify anyone before God. Therefore every gentile was condemned before the death , burial and ressurection of Christ. Therefore a muslim or a sango worshipper can be the best behaved man in terms of morals but the criteria for being righteous before God is not morals but 'belief'.

We know. nobody is saying the work of a sango worshiper will justify him/her before God.

Alwaystrue: Read Exodus chapters 19-20 and Deuteronomy chapters 4-5 and please confirm to me whether the commandments the people received there were given directly by God to the people or were given by Moses.
Till then there is no need to say anything further.
Thank you.

i don't need to read Exodus to answer your question. The problem is that you interpret posts the way it suits you. i don't remember saying the mosaic law was Moses idea. we all know it came from God. Calling it Mosaic law is to differentiate it. That instruction was addressed only to the Israelite.

ayoku777: And that is what he sends the Holy Spirit to do in us, to help us be like Jesus. If there was no law or ten commandments, what the Holy Spirit is doing in the life of every believer is what he will still do, coz its the life of Christ to him, not the keeping of the law. You can't call what the Holy Spirit does in us as keeping the law when that is what he would do anyway without the law. This attempt by law advocates to tag every good thing a christian does as keeping the law instead of the manifestation of the life of Christ is getting ridiculous, and the stubborn refusal to see this is beginning to look like there is a sinister objective behind the tag of 'LAW' for good deed.

You should know. some people just cannot live without the mosaic law cos they have a lot invested in it.

Bidam: She is more scripturally sound than you are.

I wonder what this gat to do with a christian that decides to subject him/her self to the mosaic law. You think the ticket to heaven is based on having first class in bible knowledge?

Alwaystrue: Since you have no law and thus have not sinned, why do you need & believe in Jesus Christ?

Who told you they have no law. Not being subject to the mosaic law does not make you lawless. I guess that's your problem. you think everything revolves round the mosaic law. The unbeliever is under natural/God's law.

Alwaystrue: And for those claiming the unbelievers are not under the law, go read your bibles and quit complaining.

Romans 2:14
4For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law to themselves:

You should understand by now when we say unbelievers are not under the law, we refer to the mosaic law. As for the bible verse you quote up there, verse 15 explains Paul's message here...

[color=#990000]15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.

Unbelievers doing by nature what you find in the (mosaic) law does not imply they are responding to the (mosaic) law. our forefathers did not have the law yet they knew what is to love, they knew charity, they undertood justice, these behaviors cannot be seen as a response to the mosaic law (cos they did not even have the bible). Paul is telling us here that the gentiles are under the law written on their hearts. They had their conscience to examine them. My sister, the mosaic law is for the Jews, believers and unbelievers (non jews) are not under the mosaic law.

You need to explain your comment below for people to understand you.

Ihedinobi: However, where I know that we have been differing is in the fact that God's Demands did not and do not change. The kind of man that God demanded that Adam's children be in the Old Covenant is still the kind He wants in the New. The only thing that's changed is that in the New He does not make that demand of Adam's children themselves, rather He has assumed the responsibility for it upon Himself and only demands that they trust Him with the task of making them that kind of man.

Now, that kind of man would be able to do what God was demanding in the Old Covenant, demands that, as I have said, do not change. Thus, in conforming to the New Covenant, a man would find himself more and more satisfying the demands that God expressed in the Old Covenant.

@bolded, the kind of man that God want today is not one that should do the demand in the old covenant, what he wants is one that will live to his (God's) standard/nature, and that standard is not the demand in the old covenant. The demand in the old covenant (the moral aspect) were just a representation/reflection of God's standard/nature. When we trust God with the task of making us the kind of man he wants, it is not to offer burnt offerings. What God want is the man that will love Him and love his neighbor.

@Goshen, you no dey sleep? abi you don change location?

Ihedinobi: Regarding the issue of other tribes and nations defaulting, they'd have to sign up first to default and Israel had the responsibility of extending God's invitation to them, pretty much like we Christians do too. But they did have His invitation to become part of His Covenant with Israel.

Don't know about the invitation, based on the Deuteronomy reference i can say some could be accommodated.

Ihedinobi: Zikkyy, what you think is your prerogative, I do not deign to control your thoughts. I have explained how a contract is separate from the demands and needs that it attempts to satisfy. If you disagree, you can detail why. But I'm done with discussing the issue with you. I hope you won't mind too much.

No wahala.

Ihedinobi: As for "applying" to all men, I hear you and I agree. However, I used "apply" (if I did, don't remember right now and I can't check at the moment) to mean "meant" (which is the word I feel more confident that I have been using). God's Covenants have always been meant for all the world. That's why He starts from one and builds up toward all saying things like, "through you all nations of the earth shall be blessed".

Even if you use the word 'meant', i maintain that the mosaic covenant was not meant for all men. The view that it was meant for all men cannot be supported using the bible.

Ihedinobi: Did you consider that even the Gospel came first to the Jews and per Jesus's instructions was to circulate among the Jews and the Samaritans first before going out to the rest of the world? That one nation was picked first and the covenant given to it has not ever meant that God was restricting Himself to them alone, rather it has always been because He uses them as a springboard to reach everybody else.

We know there was a plan to involve the gentiles in the gospel, but we are not aware of any plan to involve all men in the mosaic covenant.

Ubenedictus: una don start again with long arguement on law and grace abi?
I thought alwaytrue had ended the whole arguement when he clearly and biblically argue that he who works by the law of the spirit or rather by the spirit has himself fulfilled the law of the flesh.
So my dear friends what are we argueing about?

Not exactly. I think alwaystrue is somehow still holding on to the mosaic law.

Image123: you will need to read your Bible.

Which one? the gospel according to image123?

you people read the bible up-side down. even the sango worshiper today is not under the law. and he does not need to first subject himself to the law (to realise his guilt and repent) before coming to Christ. you think Paul was referring to you when he made statement about the law being a school teacher? He was referring to those already under the law before the coming of Christ.

debosky: I agree that preaching tithe as mandatory is wrong, however I do not consider such teaching as necessarily a call to bring people back under the law. To be clear - you only bring people back under the law if you preach tithing as a requirement for justification/salvation.

It will amount to bringing people back under the law if you teach tithe based on Leviticus, Numbers and Malachi.

Willzkid: Frosbel, you may think you are liberating people, but think of this
If you say a pastor that preaches that his members should dedicate 10% of his earning to God monthly is greedy, what will you say of the God that requires that 100% of our earnings be used for Him and His work?

Greed here is not based on amount. It is for preaching a false doctrine.

Ihedinobi: Are you saying that theIsraelite had no choice in the matter?

This is not about the choice of the Isrealite. They signed the agreement, so they must live by it or.....

The question is if other tribes breach (not living according to the requirement of the law) the agreement, will it result in a cancellation (or other measures dealing with non-compliance) of the agreement? even when the Israelite are complying in full? My understanding of the bible was that this agreement functioned without taking into consideration, the activities of other tribes. How can we then say the agreement applies to all? i hope you understand my confusion here.

Ihedinobi: Not that I said that it did, but what in fact did it say?

It says other some other tribes by choice can be allowed into the community of Gods people. probably mean they can subject themselves to the requirement of the agreement.

Ihedinobi: Not that I said that it did, but what in fact did it say?

so you agree it's not 'all men'

Ihedinobi: @Zikkyy
Read this post again: https://www.nairaland.com/1290444/law-given-moses-grace-truth#15724890

and this one: https://www.nairaland.com/1290444/law-given-moses-grace-truth#15725205 particularly the first one ignorance of which may be the reason you're confused.

Your answer about the Covenant and the Law is there.

Okay, i see that you are defining/explaining a covenant vs law. No wahala. but i don't think you can really separate it from the law (not in terms of definition), cos the agreement was that the Israelite shall comply with the written law. That was the basis for the covenant.

To say it applies to all men would mean all men are bound to comply with the written law based on the agreement reached by God with Israelite, and in the event they do not comply they will be seen to have breached the agreement reached on their behalf by the Israelite. am yet to find the portion of the bible where this is written, maybe you can help. even the Deuteronomy 23 reference is not saying that. any foreigner that chose to subject himself to the law on which the covenant was drawn will not be doing that based on the agreement between God and the Israelite.

Ihedinobi: Also, I do not need your endorsement of my ability or work, Zikkyy.

There is no attempt to give you a bad name. This is a forum, and it's a place to share idea, opinion/views e.t.c if i see things differently i will simply state it. i can wrong, you can wrong, we can both be wrong or right.

Ihedinobi: I will not refuse to answrr any questions

Thank you. i don't ask questions expecting a response. if it comes good, it's not a right.

Ihedinobi: but I have no responsibility or ability to make my answersacceptable to anyone.

I agree.

Ihedinobi: I am not close to a study tool that I use occasionally and I don't think I'll be for awhile or else I'd have confirmed a part of Scripture where the Lord, I think, states that if a foreigner or Gentile wanted to become part of the commonwealth of Israel and serve Israel's God, he was to be accepted upon circumcision. In many other places, particularly in the Prophets, you'll find the Lord using or speaking of Israel as His platform for reaching the rest of the world. There's a particular prophecy that betrays God's eternal intent which says that the law would go forth from Zion.

you used the word "if" here. that is foreigner can be serve Israel's God by choice. meaning the agreement reached with God (by the Israelite) applies to the Israelite and those (foreigners) that chose to subject themselves to living by the mosaic law and the covenant does not 'apply' to those that chose not to live by the requirement of the covenant. This is my understanding.

Ihedinobi: Also, I mentioned Deuteronomy 23 which implicitly says that God expected what He was doing with Israel to spread to other lands. There He listed the peoples He excepted and explained why. In fact, the Egyptians that Zikkyy named were specifically mentioned there with the Lord expressing willingness to include them in His Covenant with Israel from a specific generation. That was partly why I asked him if he read my posts at all.

I did read Deuteronomy 23, and it did not say "all men".