care package

Festus

Mercy Shown said:

Romans 3:20 declares, “For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.” Some interpreters have argued that Paul is speaking of two distinct laws: the ceremonial law, which could not justify, and the moral law, which continues to bind believers. This reading, however, is a later development in Christian history rather than Paul’s own intent.​

In the early church, figures like Irenaeus, Origen, Chrysostom, and Augustine typically read Paul’s reference to “the law” (nomos) as the Mosaic law in its entirety. They emphasized that the law reveals sin but does not bring righteousness, and they did not suggest that Paul was distinguishing between two different laws.

A more formal distinction emerged in medieval theology. Thomas Aquinas articulated a tripartite division of the Mosaic law: moral, ceremonial, and judicial. The moral law expressed timeless ethical principles, the ceremonial law governed Israel’s worship and sacrifices, and the judicial law regulated Israel’s civic life. Although Aquinas did not claim Paul himself made this division, his framework shaped subsequent readings of Romans.

During the Reformation, Martin Luther and John Calvin emphasized justification by faith apart from works of the law. To preserve the ongoing authority of the Ten Commandments while rejecting salvation by works, they leaned on the moral/ceremonial distinction. Calvin in particular stressed that the moral law still bound believers, while the ceremonial law had been fulfilled in Christ. This approach encouraged Protestants to interpret Romans 3:20 as if Paul were distinguishing between different kinds of law.

In the centuries that followed, Protestant confessions such as the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) codified this division, and it became common for preachers and commentators to read Romans 3:20 through that lens. The two-law theory thus served as a theological tool in debates over antinomianism, allowing Christians to affirm both salvation by grace and the necessity of obedience.

Modern scholarship, however, has largely set aside the two-law framework as an anachronism. Studies of Second Temple Judaism have shown that Jews of Paul’s day viewed Torah as a unified covenant, not as divisible into moral and ceremonial parts. Scholars such as E.P. Sanders and proponents of the “New Perspective on Paul” argue that Paul’s concern was not with distinguishing kinds of laws but with showing that Torah as a whole cannot justify. For Paul, the law in its entirety reveals sin, but righteousness comes only through faith in Christ.

In sum, the theory that Paul spoke of two laws in Romans 3:20 reflects later theological developments, especially medieval and Reformation attempts to reconcile Paul’s teaching with the continuing role of God’s commands. While historically influential, it does not appear to be what Paul himself meant.

Click to expand...

I think that's great. Yes, the Law contained all the elements later said to contain moral, ceremonial, and judicial aspects. But they were all a single agreement. Failing to obey Sabbath Law was the same as failure to respect God's name and not use it "vainly." Our failure under ceremonial law was equal to our failure under moral law.

We not only fail to carry out God's instructions at times, but we also fail to abide by morals perfectly. We all are guilty of a kind of murder when we get angry with one another. We are all guilty of lust when we look too long in the wrong direction.

The covenant of Law condemned the whole human race, including Israel who was under that covenant, because all sinners, by their record, are prevented from access to the Tree of Life. It was a single covenant that required holiness of Israel, but at the same time it showed that nobody qualifies for Eternal Life apart from Christ and his mercy.

The Law accomplished an important matter in establishing what had been known since the garden, that the human record under the effects of sin disqualified all sinners from the Tree of Life. And so, moral, ceremonial, and judicial law all condemned Israel as sinners, disqualified from Salvation, if they failed to proceed to God's cure, which is obedience to Christ.

It is quite true that God's Law remains in effect as a moral standard for all mankind. We remain subject to God's word and to God's Law. But we will not find Eternal Life by obeying God's word under the Law of Moses, neither moral, ceremonial, nor judicial. Not only would such an "obedience" disqualify us from Life, but it would show contempt for Christ who fulfilled the very Mercy that the Law of Moses had been directing Israel towards.

We follow moral law, though not under the Law of Moses but now under obedience to Christ, who combines law and mercy. If we live by his Spirit we will not only show his righteousness, but in showing his righteousness we will also qualify for his mercy.

It is not important to show that obedience to God is similar under the covenant of Law and the covenant of Christ. The important thing is to direct our morality to the same God who presided over both covenants and who now asks nothing more than we obey Christ, His Son. In doing so, not only is our record of failure eliminated, but we have mercy through the one whose record qualified him to forgive us.

Under the Law our moral record condemned us. By obedience to Christ we rely on Christ's mercy and the grace of his gift of righteousness. We continue to live moral lives and to live by the law of God's word. But we know that our record would disqualify us if we did not turn to Christ for mercy.

divine providence is about.

Without divine providence . . .

Desk trauma said:

Just mars, other space exploration ok?

Click to expand...

Depends on what they want to accomplish. Manned missions? Absolutely not.

Grateful folks are happier folks.

lucypevensie said:

This is Post #1 of this thread:

“Ok...so what you do is its all 1st names. One boy, then one girl, then a boy...you get the drift. The name has to start with the last letter of the word before.


So...heres the 1st name...

William (so the next person has to do a girl name starting with m)”

Click to expand...

I stand corrected. Thank you.

rebornfree said:

That's great! Prayer makes a massive difference. Also you guys are doing the work on the street. It's good to know that others are supporting you in prayer.

Click to expand...

Amen to that! Definitely always need prayer. Just like we'll be at a witchcraft/psychic fair this Saturday to evangelize and need all the prayer we can get!

But for the long term, women leaving the church will mean fewer members in church over time. It's mothers and grandmothers who perpetuate religious tradition.

Gazans are chanting other stuff too. Apparently they think they won the war. Maybe they did.


Login to view embedded media

Aryeh Jay said:

It's strange, both contain gluten. I thought all the hate America Liberal Commy Nazi's treated gluten like kryptonite.

Click to expand...

Our brave antifa warriors risk their lives every day to bring us epic content we can share and laugh at together.

Just when you think you’ve heard it all. Barron Trump is on the app. What a circus.

Gregory Thompson said:

People who are under the influence of demons always take pride in being "in the know" about things other people "can't possibly understand"

So the implied background here is concerning.

Click to expand...

They don’t realize that’s the case and believe they’re hearing from the Lord.

~bella

stars1777 said:

How would you live your life if you truly were doomed to hellfire because of this sin? I don't want to hear anyone say that if you are worried about it, you haven't committed it. Please just give me a straight answer to this question please.

Click to expand...

Well, I doubt that you would believe that you are doomed. I guess that you wouldn't be interested in God at all. How such a person would live their life would depend on what they were like. They might be hedonistic or they might be normal people going about their every day lives or they might be a great philanthropist. The one thing they wouldn't do is make time for God (because if they did, it cannot be the unforgivable sin, as I understand it), and if someone mentioned Him they might be disparaging or disinterested.

Of course that is different from somebody struggling with sin who could come back to God in repentance. Or if they didn't want to, they could ask God to change their heart so that they wanted to.

Those are my thoughts but I may be wrong.

stevevw said:

I think they have a right to open to the public. It is usually up to the public is they choose to use such a hospital. But in doing so they also have to adjust as needed where specific issues which may cross the line like this one. Which are going to be the exception and not the rule as far as their service being anti abortion and performing no abortions but rather supporting women who want to have their baby or feel unsure.

Click to expand...

I appreciate the charitable tone of your posts. Regarding the first sentence in the above paragraph: The problem is that like most hospitals, government funding (such as Medicare and Medicaid) likely accounts for a sizeable portion of their revenue. They are supported by the public and they must serve the public, not one particular religious denomination or set of religious beliefs.

It seems like you are in agreement that they should have handled this situation differently. Personally, I believe they should have a right to not perform elective abortions - but that is not what this was. Again - it seems like you're in agreement on this... so just reiterating the points which you have made.

ChubbyCherub said:

Does judgment day apply to those who are saved or only the unsaved?

Click to expand...

Each and every person must stand and give account before Christ on the Last Day.

Remember what Jesus says in Matthew 25?

Grace is not an excuse to sin. Each of us must answer for the things we said, thought, and did.

Nobody is saved by their works, as though we can be "good enough"; but neither does merely claiming faith in Jesus mean we can live however we want and expect we have some golden ticket to glory.

This is the sobering truth Scripture presents us: It is only by grace alone that we shall pass through the fire, all of our works are as filthy rags, no one is righteous--not even one. So we cannot boast in ourselves, for there is nothing within us to boast; we are of our own abilities fully and totally worthless (insofar as righteousness is concerned). Yet grace is not justification to live indulgently, "Since grace abounds, shall we go on sinning? Heaven forbid!". We must at every moment recognize that it is only out of the kindness of God's love poured out through Christ that there is anything for us at all--and that means we are saved by grace alone; and it means that we shall be judged by what we have done (and what we have left undone). That is why the Gospel is good news to the sinner, "You are forgiven"--for the sinner who knows he is but a beggar beholds the treasure that is grace; but the sinner who is arrogant and places his confidence in himself is still but a beggar; but a beggar who thinks he is wealthy is merely delusional. Therefore, come before the gracious and good and loving God who gives you Himself in Christ; not with boasting but in faith. For faith alone can receive what God gives. So, then, in faith be obedient, through love, and by humility, be a disciple and a servant--for the one who stands clothed with mercy has much; but the one who comes merely with himself stands naked and ashamed on that Future Day.

It is by what God does alone that we enter into His presence, as pure gift and kindness.
But the path to hell is paved by ourselves.

We are saved by what God does alone.
We are damned by what we do alone.

-CryptoLutheran

A New Dawn said:

You obviously have never met any persons who had similar experiences to Saul/Paul. And you seem to be discounting his experience, also. You really should get to know the experiences of people in the Bible as well as you think you know what they teach. Or better, since you don’t seem to understand what is laid out clearly by Jesus concerning how the salvation process works.

We don’t need to know with infallible certainty who were given to Jesus. Jesus knows who were given to Jesus, and all we need to do is preach the gospel so those with ears to hear, hear.

Click to expand...

Well, you're the one who says we can know. And yes, I've known those who've had similiar experiences to Paul's even if it's "obvious" that I have not. And the experience I object to is the one that says the person is so overwhelmingly changed that they could not possibly fail, or turn back away. And I believe I know enough about the character of Paul to say he had a great deal of confidence regarding his final destiny while simultaneosuly having the humility and understanding to know he had to strive, make effort, do his part.

Hamas is 100% at fault here. And they’ve brainwashed their people they’re “governing” to hate Israel and anyone who lives there. It’s disgusting. Hamas needs to be wiped out.

GoldenBoy89 said:

I don’t hate ICE. I hate what they’re doing to people, both American and non. There’s no excuse for the level of cruelty and underhanded tactics they are employing in their mission.

Click to expand...

They're being used by a fascist regime, and thus they are acting as a fascist arm.

It doesn't help, either, that they pretty much have a "Come join ICE, you can hurt brown people and make money!" inviting all manner of scumbags to come wear a mask and violate the rights of the American people.

I mean, seriously, this is the official website right now:


-CryptoLutheran

RileyG said:

It’s a Bible that is approved by the Catholic Church. I also own it, and about 50+ other bibles.

Click to expand...

I thought I had a lot of Bibles! I have a wardrobe/dresser drawer full plus 2 or 3 on my bookshelf. You’ve got me beat.

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN said:

Some Trump supporters are starting to call this a Democrat hoax.

Click to expand...

So is Trump.