₦airaland Forum

Bidam: Is that what that scripture actaully meant? ABEG make i travel before i die with laughter..keep them coming bro..bring it on..i will reply later thanks.

why you dey fool ya self? i would advise that you read Romans 1.

Ihedinobi: Are you saying that Paul's letters to individuals or, in fact, any letter to an individual in the Scriptures is irrelevant to the whole Church?

you are not adding value to this discussion if all you do is ask questions

Ihedinobi: Which of us advocates subjecting Christians to the dictates of the law of rituals (I know that that is what you actually mean)?

Not really. My focus has been on the moral aspect of the law e.g. the 10 commandment.

Ihedinobi: How exactly does Moses help anyone comprehend the Gospel better?

with all the references to the OT in the NT teachings by the apostle, most of these teachings would have been greek to you if you don't have knowledge of what they talking about. anyways, it's still greek to some people.

Ihedinobi: Regard Moses's law as the model and Jesus as the actual building. Now, would the two look alike? Would they be the same principle (note the word)?

if one cannot create the actual building from the model, of what use is the model then? we know the Jews could not achieve love by reliance on the law.

Ihedinobi: I probably missed it. Could you refer me to it again?

i did not interpret your post to say zikkyy doing a recon for ihedinobi's enjoyment. have done a personal recon and don't see any relationship between my post and the scripture you referring to You first need to understand my post before asking for a recon. The 1 Timothy verse you referring to served the purpose when Paul made reference to it in 1 Corinthians 9.

my post was saying that one that is spirit led do not need to make reference to the written law (mosaic) to know he should not kill (for example). unless you are telling me the spirit himself is not aware of this fact and also need to consult the written law for such guidance. If Jesus did not need to law to guide his personal conduct why do i need the law now that i have Christ in me?

Bidam: Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters. 1cor7:19 KJV.

And this is love, that we walk after his commandments.2 John 1:6 KJV


1 John 2:3-7

English Standard Version (ESV)

3 And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, 5 but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: 6 whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.



1 John 5:3

New King James Version (NKJV)

3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome.

.....and what exactly is God's commandment? Do you think the writer was referring to the mosaic law?

1 John 3:23 (NIV)
23 And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us.

1 John 4:21 (NIV)
21 And he has given us this command: Anyone who loves God must also love their brother and sister.

Bidam: I think you might as well tear the OT from your bible.This your statement get as e bi..are you telling us Jesus never read the Torah or Paul and the others for guidance?

Reading the mosaic law as a teaching guide is not bad e.g. to help in your understanding of the gospel. The problem really is when you now decide to live by the mosaic law. Jesus or Paul did not teach that you should subject ya self to the requirements of the mosaic law.

Ihedinobi: I imagine you can reconcile this with the same Scripture you quoted on Goshen's thread from Paul's first letter to Timothy talking about how all Scripture is inspired by God and useful for instruction, correction, rebuking, exhortation and making perfect the man of God. I'd like to hear the reconciliation.

Have done the recon already and knows that learning does not equate to adoption.

Bidam: @ the emboldened before the compilations of the NT. WHAT BOOKS ARE READ IN THE SYNAGOGUE EVERY SABBATH?

Maybe you should first ask ya self if Paul was talking to Jews or Gentiles in that verse. BTW, which time you begin attend synagogue

Image123: oh my days, the joy of zikky.

Bidam: Trust zikky and kun to be attracted to this thread like a moth to a flame.

Image123: That guy handles it more like oxygen sef.

Jobless posters

Goshen360: @ Alwaystrue & Ihedinobi & Bidam & perhaps, Enigma,

leave Enigma out of it, i think the man just want you to exercise some caution. That's all

Ihedinobi: So you have, have you? Pray tell, what's the reason?

abeg go to the tithing thread jor have stated the reason there

ayoku777: @ Goshen

thanks, why would we need to know what the law says to do and what not to do when i can just be spirit-led and let him live out the life of Christ through me. People thing the holy spirit is given to help us obey the law, no, he helps us manifest the life of Christ in us

This is the problem am having with the law lovers, how can somebody that claimed to be spirit led be reading the law for guidance? in a way i see it as the spirit himself flipping through the pages of the mosaic law for direction. Its either you are book-led or you are spirit led. to return to the book implies doubt or lack of confidence in the spirit.

Ihedinobi: ^^ Well, I actually was expecting someone to pop up and make an issue of it.

So, where's the fire? What's the smoke? I like the old covenant now because I need tithes? Or what exactly am I in hopes of being accused of?

Lol! i knew there has to be a reason for your loving moses am yet to see a lover of moses with no tithe sorry strings attached

BTW am not making it an issue it's your life, live it. Just don't preach it sha

Ihedinobi: And have we not been teaching Christ?

oga read my post very well. am not saying you have not been teaching Christ all am saying saying is that i don't wanna read any old school law stuff from you. Anyways, have seen the reason why you said 'the law' sorry Christ is very relevant to Christians (on the tithing thread )

Ihedinobi: Tithes are Scriptural as are free will offerings. I did not believe this or accept it until about two/three weeks ago or so. But a dear sister on this forum said some things that forced me to pay attention in addition to things that were changing in my life at the time.

i talk am! have been suspecting this was the source of your love for moses there is no smoke without fire they say

Bidam: Paul's message to the Galatians is to remind them of the correct equation:

Torah-based faith + Nothing Else = Salvation

Na wa o!

Galatians 3:2 (NIV)
I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?

My quoting Galatians 3:2 is based on the assumption that you actually received the spirit i could be wrong

For people like you Jesus was wasting his time on the cross

Bidam: The whole bible is NOT a logical book, it is a spiritual book.

i ask one question and you are responding to something else all i wanted to know was how to classify the Nigerian law? Natural or spiritual. that simple question was all it take for you start speaking in tongues

Ihedinobi: If you ask me what Law and give me options when I have consistently held that there is only one Law, what do you expect me to answer, Zikkyy? Choose which Law you prefer. As far as the Scriptures are concerned, there is only one Law and it is Christ. And I have not minced words about that in any discussion pertaining to this issue.

Na so you talk am? okay o so i can update that ya post na

Ihedinobi: With regard to Grace, I will say to you what I said to Goshen on another thread as a summary. Grace means nothing without the Law Christ.

i think this one make sense. abi, how you see am?

edit: so i expect you guys to teach Christ o! i don't wanna read any old school law stuff around here

Ihedinobi: Please explain how I am playing 419 and avoiding taking a stand.

Another attempt at question dodging just answer Goshe's question jor abi you dey fear to answer that question

Enigma: The true "balance" is having a proper understanding and appreciation of the law in the era of the New Testament or New Covenant.

Having a proper understanding of the content of the mosaic law is not the same thing as implementing/subjecting oneself to the requirement of the mosaic law. when we say the mosaic law is no longer relevant, we don't have people like you in mind, you know the target audience na

Enigma: Real balance is that the Spirit of Christ gives the true understanding of the law; Christ Himself "fulfilled" the law. By following the Spirit of Christ, Christians will more than keep the law as it was (or became or came to be practiced) but in the truth of what was always intended.

you self know what we are talking about here the problem is that our target audience will interpret your post above to read that Christians can still follow/apply the mosaic law as given i really don't see the need for a Christian to be thinking mosaic when responding to the Christ law. i see it as a contradiction.

Bidam: Why do i get this notion that anytime Paul talks about Law what readily comes to your mind is the mosaic law?

Anytime Paul talks about a law. he will always indicate the law he has in mind (atleast 98% of the time), so we cannot be wrong when we say Paul was referring to the mosaic law cos Paul already shown he was talking about the mosaic law.

Bidam: There are two kinds of laws. 1.Natural laws. 2.Spiritual laws.

what about the Law of the Federal Republic of Nigeria? is that one natural or spiritual law?

Ihedinobi: With regard to Grace, I will say to you what I said to Goshen on another thread as a summary. Grace means nothing without the Law.

Goshen360: what law? Mosaic or messianic law? I do not teach that grace means lawlessness but what law are Christians under? Of mosaic or messianic?

Please answer to this so I clearly know your stand?

Ihedinobi: How many Laws are there? What are they?

Ihedinobi is just playing 419 here he is not so keen on taking a stand. Oga Ihedinobi, please come out and tell us what you mean by "the law"

Bidam: true word i wonder why zikky keeps going round in circles.

If you must post here, you should try responding to posts you read on NL, not what you read in your dreams

Ihedinobi: If you are now at peace with the fact that Deuteronomy 28 is for Christians,

if you apply it as stated in the 2 Timothy verse i quoted, no problem.

Ihedinobi: And I have hinted already at what it says, but just seeing the part where unrighteousness brings the Christian under the power of the Law prevented you, my brother, from seeing it.

This bit we have not agreed.

Ihedinobi: Again, there is no confusion in saying that a man is not subject to the law and yet the law is meant for him. If the man's very nature is the law, then the law serves to teach him who and what he is and how to fully utilize his potentials. Isn't that why we have education for our kids? Are they under some commandment to behave like humans? Do we not educate them in order to explain to them what they are and help them know what is in or out of character for them, what potentials they have and how to take full advantage of such potentials? Why should the law be any different?

my understanding of ya position is this: (see scripture reference below )

2 Timothy 3:16 (NIV)
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

if am correct, then it means we have been saying the same thing.

Ihedinobi: Repeating the same thing over and over again is tiring, bro. I have said to you many times already that we are in agreement that the Christian is not subject to the Law and thus is not commanded by it. So, your reiteration that the Law is not a command to Christians is only annoying.

Don't know why you dey 'form' annoyance for hia when you are the one causing confusion. example is the post below:

Ihedinobi: Zikkyy, the thread is about whether Deuteronomy 28 is for Christians and I have said many times already that the Christian is not subject to the Law. As far as this thread is concerned, that Scripture proves that Deuteronomy 28 is for Christians.

consider the red and blue highlights, are you saying the same thing? please clarify what you meant by Deuteronomy 28 is for Christians. Deuteronomy 28 if i remember correctly refers to blessings and curses attached to obeying or disobeying the law.

Ihedinobi: Zikkyy, the thread is about whether Deuteronomy 28 is for Christians and I have said many times already that the Christian is not subject to the Law. As far as this thread is concerned, that Scripture proves that Deuteronomy 28 is for Christians.

Oga, please clarify what you mean by Deuteronomy 28 is for Christians. You stated somewhere that when a Christian act in an unrighteous manner, he comes under the law and therefore subject to the curses. If you are not saying this please clarify. Thanks.

brilapluz: 13 Don't you know that those who
work in the temple get their
food from the temple, and
those who serve at the altar
share in what is offered on
the altar? 14 In the same way, the Lord has
commanded that those who
preach the gospel should
receive their living from the
gospel.15

Paul again focused on a similar principle in the law here. We can see here that Paul reference to the OT activities (the law ensured that those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar) was not to show a command applicable to Christians.

Ihedinobi: In fact, I think that that Scripture that Enigma posted effectively ended this discussion.

How? its not proof that Christians can still be subjected to the law!

Ihedinobi: It explicitly regards the Law of Moses as God's Authority....

Yes it's God's authority, but meant for the jews or anybody that chose to live by the law (probably).

Ihedinobi: ....and good for reference when instructing Christians....

No argument here. confirmed using 2 Timothy 3:16

Ihedinobi: .....and correcting carnal ones

This is not compulsory. God's moral law has always be there; before the law, in the law and after the law. Remember it was based on this same law that the flood came (the one that left just Noah & is family standing), it was based on this same law that Sodom & Gomorah came down. Everything you need for correction on morals, you find in Christ law. So why should anybody be thinking Moses when it comes to the issue of morals when you already live by a better law?

Ihedinobi: So, I'd rather hear how you regard that passage than continue prolonging matters, if it's all the same to you, Zikkyy.

i believe i have done just that sir

Ihedinobi: Only "abnormal"? I daresay that Paul appealed to the Law to validate his right to support. In fact, he refered to what the Law said as what God Himself said. And elevated it above human authority.

If i apply this reasoning, then it's safe for me to say also that Paul also appealed to common (human) practices to validate his right to support. You must also consider verse 7.

1 Corinthians 9:7-10 (NIV)
7 Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat its grapes? Who tends a flock and does not drink the milk? 8 Do I say this merely on human authority? Doesn’t the Law say the same thing? 9 For it is written in the Law of Moses: “Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.”[a] Is it about oxen that God is concerned? 10 Surely he says this for us, doesn’t he? Yes, this was written for us, because whoever plows and threshes should be able to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest.

The reference to the law was meant to reinforce the argument already laid out in verse 7 i.e. "Doesn’t the Law say the same thing?". The reference to the law is not as a command but to show that God is also concerned about the welfare of workers.

Ihedinobi: And he wasn't making any request at all in that letter with respect to his support. That portion of his letter was all about him proving that he had a right that he had willingly waived and which had been taken for granted for the wrong reasons.

I agree. my error. the use of the word "request" was not appropriate. Thanks

Ihedinobi: Edit: furthermore, Paul explicitly regarded as what the Law said as applying to Christians. Look at the second bolded statement in that passage where Enigma posted it.

Surely he says this for us, doesn’t he? Yes, this was written for us, because whoever plows and threshes should be able to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest.

Not as a command, because Paul only considered the principle behind that law. The Jews would have applied it to the letter by ensuring the oxen is not gagged while it is treading out the grain.

Ihedinobi: @debosky
@Zikkyy

Now that we all understand what I mean by an unrighteous Christian, let us see what the Scriptures themselves say, shall we?

1 Timothy 1:3-11
...I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thoi mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine, neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: from which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling; desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully; knowing this, that THE LAW IS NOT MADE FOR A RIGHTEOUS MAN, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of father and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God...

All emphases are mine and worth attention with respect to this discussion. From the text above, we can make the following inferences;

1. Love was the purpose or end of the Law, such Love as issued from a pure heart, a good conscience and an unfeigned faith (that is, a real, not pretended, faith)

2. There are those who set about to teach the law but in divorcing it from its goal, make nonsense of it.

3. There is a right use of the law. And when it is used in that way, the law is good.

4. The wrong use is to apply it to a righteous man. This makes sense because it is nonsense to tell a man who naturally and ordinarily doea everything right and does no wrong because it is not in his nature to do wrong that he is obliged to do right and avoid wrong.

5. The right use is to apply it to unrighteous people and unrighteous acts, attitudes, speakings etc.

6. It is the Gospel that there is now a righteous Man Who is equal to the Law, whose actions, words and thoughts cannot be condemned by the Law since the Law is satisfied by them and cannot fault them.

No wahala bros.

Ihedinobi: @debosky
Now, when a Christian is in unrighteousness for any reason, there are two things to note: that he is a Christian and that he is in unrighteousness. Knowing that the first condition means that the Christian has righteousness, we have a situation where the law both "applies" and " does not apply".

In any matter where the Christian is being unrighteous, he is under the power of the law and subject to its curses. But should he repent, immediately he is raised up from beneath the law and without further ado is set free from its curses. But while he abides in unrighteousness, the law has power over him. Consider the prodigal son.

My brother, Paul says the law is good for checking evil doers, cos it shows them their sin. But only those for which the law was meant can be subject to the curse of the law. It is not a basis for judging those that were never under the law. take another look at verse 6-7 of that quote you posted:

1 Timothy 1:6-7(NIV)
6 Some have departed from these and have turned to meaningless talk. 7 They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm.

Consider the blue highlights. Before you can be under the power of the law and be subject to its curses, you must first be subject to the law. The people Paul was referring to were probably judaizers. If Gentiles who were never under the law could not be judged under the law prior to conversion, on what basis will they now be subject to the curse of the law in the event they fall out with God. Consider Romans 2:12

Romans 2:12 (NIV)
12 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law.