Hello B-A-C.
Your simple statement in your earlier post # 6 was as follows.
The Bible says those live without the law will perish by the law.
Those who live without the law, or better still, anyone who did not grow up in Israel
at the time of Christ, i.e. a Gentile, will perish quite apart from the letter of the law.
Gentiles are not under the letter of the law and will not be judged according to that
law system.
No Gentile will be held to account for working on a sabbath day, I can assure you of
that B-A-C. No Gentile will ever be accused of breaking God's ten commandments,
because the Gentile nations were never given these commandments in the first instance.
In other words, the Gentiles were never the recipients of the written law or the letter of
the law. Gentiles are not under the written law, or the letter of the law, and never were
under the law of Moses.
Romans 4
15 for the Law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, there also is no violation.
Yes B-A-C you read that correctly, there is a definable relationship between a passage of legislation
and an offence. Where there is no law there will never be a violation of law. Gentiles cannot be
held accountable for any violation of the written law if they were not given that legislation.
So your statement 'The Bible says those live without the law will perish by the law.' Is an invalid
statement, there is no evidence to support that statement.
Everything that was a sin in the OT for Jews, is still a sin them and Gentiles under the New Testament.
This statement of your is yet another generalization and also an invalid statement, B-A-C.
There are a multitude of offences listed within the law of Moses, that in the Gentile world are simply
not offences. The law of Moses is a national law system B-A-C and applies only to the Jews.
I do not need to supply you with an array of laws that confirm this to be the case.
Shall we continue B-A-C, you made the following claim.
It even says the Gentiles who aren't circumcised yet keep the commandments, will judge the Jews
who are circumcised but do not keep the commandments.
The text does not specifically state what you stated B-A-C. You ommitted a very important line
that appears after these two verses in Romans, and a line that holds the key to understanding what
Paul is actually saying. Here is the text your referring to below.
Romans 2
26 So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision
be regarded as circumcision? 27 And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law,
will he not judge you who though having
the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor
of the Law?
We should be aware that the law was not written to save anyone, nor is it possible for a Jew
or even a Gentile to keep the law with any consistency. Paul is not stating a fact as such, but is
asking two questions, Paul is not literally saying that a Gentile will obey the law better than a Jew.
How could anyone for one moment think, that a Gentile has some inbuilt advantage over a Jew
when it comes to legal obedience.
We only need to read on a little further to see what Paul is actually saying in the wider context.
Romans 2
29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit,
not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.
Circumcision is of the heart and that circumcision is performed by the Holy Spirit!
Not a legal obedience to the law and definitely not an obedience to the letter of the law. Tell me
B-A-C, you did not miss that extremely important part of Paul's sentence in the earlier quotation
did you? I hope not B-A-C. Here is that crucial part 'having the letter of the Law and circumcision'.
Paul is telling us the Jews have the letter of the law and circumcision, but the Gentiles
do not have either. Gentiles are not under the letter of the law, only the Jews are under the
letter of the law.
It is the inward regeneration wrought by the Spirit that allows a physical Jew to be obedient to God.
A spirit filled Jew has been spiritually circumcised and obeys the inner influence of the Holy Spirit.
The wider context does not allow the superficial interpretation that you forced from those two earlier
verses.
The law condemns and the law could never be obeyed by any Jew or any Greek.
Romans 7
6 But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound,
so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.
Paul a Jew was released from the constraint of the law, Paul is talking to the Jewish audience at Rome.
Paul is not talking directly to the Gentiles in this chapter, for the Gentiles were not under the law
of Mt Sinai. Paul serves in the newness of the Spirit and not the letter of the law!
Practically every commandment is repeated in the New Testament and written to Gentiles.
For example in Galations (which was a letter written to Gentiles).
Gal 5:19; Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality,
Gal 5:20; idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions,
Gal 5:21; envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
B-A-C, you are making claims that the text does not warrant, checques that you cannot cash.
Galatians 5
19 Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality...
The word Paul uses here is 'immorality', Paul does not use the word 'adultery'. This is not a reference
by Paul to one of the ten commandments written in Exodus. That is a false claim B-A-C, the text does not
support that claim of yours. Adultery is a specific offence, immorality covers a broad canvas of offences.
If you see the word 'immorality' as a set of offences, then adultery is but one member of a virtual
infinite set of individual members.
Your looking for a correlation between adultery and the word 'immorality'.
There is no correlation evident and you do need to buy a dictionary.
There we have 3 items that were listed in the 10 commandments, envy, idolatry, immorality, (adultery) .
Not true at all B-A-C, as the other deeds mentioned clearly indicate that Paul is not pushing
a legal wheel barrow. Paul is using the general meaning of the descriptive words and not the
legal, letter form of the commandments.
Now for 'envy' which you once again see some association with coveting.
Covet means to yearn to possess something, so when you look at your neighbors oxen you want that oxen.
Whereas envy means a feeling of discontent or resentful longing aroused by someone else’s possessions.
They are different Greek verbs, describing quite different human feelings. One means to long for something
and the other means a discontentment is felt because one does not have something one desires.
If Paul meant to use 'coveting', Paul would simply have used 'coveting', after all the commandment
uses the term 'covet'.
Last but not least is the deed of the flesh 'idolatry', which is probably the closest to a commandment
that you will find in this verse. Though once again the letter of the law was not quoted by Paul.
Paul uses a simple and general term 'idolatry'.
I do not see a list of the ten commandments in Paul's writing and certainly not the letter of
the law. You have not refuted any position concerning the law with your haphazard and loose
interpretation of the text.