Obey God?

I believe that once we are (truly) saved, we will have evidence in our lives to reflect that, i.e. obedience to God and His commandments.

James 2:18 - But someone will say, " You have faith, and I have works." Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith BY my works.
 
good scripture, Jab. James (the Lord's brother) recognized that our faith should have accompanying signs. Like I've heard it said, "Obedience is the root of our salvation; it's the FRUIT of our salvation"
 
Thread starter #23
Isn't it kinda weird though or confusing that Salvation is given by grace and not anything we do, yet scripture reads like we have to be obedient to show proof that we received the free gift?

It's like God saying, "I'm going to give you this gift based on nothing you do. It has to be grace and not works or it's not grace. But, there is a but. If you don't remain obedient through works, I'll take my free gift away"

That's almost like God saying it actually isn't a free gift. That salvation actually "is" base on ones works. That is "is" from man.
 
Thread starter #24
Then to complicate things even more, the poor Christian has to figure out exactly what sins he can't commit, what laws he has to keep, what ceremonies to keep, etc.

I thought Christ died for my inability of not being able to keep his Father's Law. Now I'm being told by Jesus, Paul, and the other apostles, that I must.

Even most Christians believe we must produce some fruit as proof. What the problem is, we can't agree on exactly what fruit and what quantity. One sin, fifty sins a week? Break one Law, break fifty Laws a week? Keep some of Paul's Church guidelines or all of Paul's guidelines?

It appears to be a conflicting enigma within Christianity.
 
Our righteousness is imputed.

Think of it as a change of garments.
Jesus took our robe of sin and put it on Himself.
He then put on us His robe of righteousness.
Now, forever, we are perfectly righteous in His sight.
NOTHING can or will change that. He decreed it.
 
James 2:24 You see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith alone. Why would the Lord's brother say that? It took Abraham actually making the trip to Mount Mariah going up the mountain and attempting to kill Isaac before God saw that his faith was genuine. God could have stopped him once they got on their horses and headed that way, but He didn't. (BTW, I love that the bible includes Abraham putting the wood on Isaac's back! What a shadow of the sacrifice to come!)
 
Then to complicate things even more, the poor Christian has to figure out exactly what sins he can't commit, what laws he has to keep, what ceremonies to keep, etc.

I thought Christ died for my inability of not being able to keep his Father's Law. Now I'm being told by Jesus, Paul, and the other apostles, that I must.

Even most Christians believe we must produce some fruit as proof. What the problem is, we can't agree on exactly what fruit and what quantity. One sin, fifty sins a week? Break one Law, break fifty Laws a week? Keep some of Paul's Church guidelines or all of Paul's guidelines?

It appears to be a conflicting enigma within Christianity.
In Acts 15 the council comes up with the minimum set, SINCE GENTILES KNEW NOTHING OF THE LAW. Acts 15:21 tells us that the Gentiles WOULD LEARN what God's desire is over time by listening to Moses' words on Sabbath. BTW, in Acts 15, the discussion was NEVER about whether the Law was done away with, only if it was NECESSARY for salvation. It wasn't. Obedience was always from the heart.
 
Thread starter #28
Our righteousness is imputed.

Think of it as a change of garments.
Jesus took our robe of sin and put it on Himself.
He then put on us His robe of righteousness.
Now, forever, we are perfectly righteous in His sight.
NOTHING can or will change that. He decreed it.
Did that make or change how we are to be obedient? If God elected someone three thousand years ago, was his obedience guidelines different from ours after the Cross?
Did the Cross change how one was to obey God? When God elects an individual and imputes "His" righteousness, how does that effect how we show obedience?
 
Thread starter #29
If the Cross didn't do away with how we were to be obedient, then we should still be obedient in the same way believers were before the Cross.
There are plenty of believers that say the Cross didn't "change" anything within time about obedience. That Noah obeyed God the same way as Abraham. That we obey God the same way David did.

Yet Paul tells us the Cross did something within time to change something about how we were to obey God.
 
Jesus was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of the house of Isreal (Northern tribes) His death made a way for the lost sheep to come back. Deut 30 says that God would scatter his people around the world like sheep....but that they would in later days return to obeying Him. Obedience has always been Gods desire for his bride. It's how we show Him Love.

Guys, this is nothing to get upset over. Obedience is not a salvation issue, but obedience does look to be the fruit of our salvation (James 2 I John 5) Salvation is a gift, if you endure to the end in faith.
 
If the Cross didn't do away with how we were to be obedient, then we should still be obedient in the same way believers were before the Cross.
There are plenty of believers that say the Cross didn't "change" anything within time about obedience. That Noah obeyed God the same way as Abraham. That we obey God the same way David did.

Yet Paul tells us the Cross did something within time to change something about how we were to obey God.
Also, we read in Acts where the only people who knew how to be obedient - JEWS - were being obedient, well after Jesus ascended. In Acts 21 I believe, James tells Paul that there were "thousands of believing Jews in Jerusalem who were zealous of the Law".
 
Thread starter #32
Jesus was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of the house of Isreal (Northern tribes) His death made a way for the lost sheep to come back. Deut 30 says that God would scatter his people around the world like sheep....but that they would in later days return to obeying Him. Obedience has always been Gods desire for his bride. It's how we show Him Love.

Guys, this is nothing to get upset over. Obedience is not a salvation issue, but obedience does look to be the fruit of our salvation (James 2 I John 5) Salvation is a gift, if you endure to the end in faith.
Then there is a stipulation. One must endure to the end. My Church as a boy taught this stipulation. They taught this obedience was the fruit. I will agree that somehow, somewhere this has changed over time.

Didn't James show this more than Paul? I can't read Ephesians 2 though and see the Cross part of Christ's mission as being only for the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Perhaps his teaching part was while he was on the earth.

In Ephesians 2, Paul says the Gentiles were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world.

That by the blood of Jesus, Gentiles have been brought near. That Jesus brought down the wall that separated the two. That Christ made the two groups one.

Jesus did this by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees. He did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace.

Regardless of whom the wall divided, Jesus removed it. It then allowed the grafting in of Gentiles to the Commonwealth of Israel.
The only way this grafting could take place was if the law of commandments and decrees were abolished. That is why Jesus said he abolished it. Where the two could become one.

I'm not sure exactly how all this ties back in to our obedience. We still must be obedient. Romans 11 tells us if we quit believing. If we quit trusting in God, we can be removed from the grafting.

"For if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you either."


So maybe free grace doesn't exactly give us free reign. We still must be obedient. But if Jesus abolished the laws and decrees, what then is this obedience? Is it Paul's guidelines?

We are quick to say that commiting homosexuality is not being obedient to God. That we can't use the Old Testament to tell us that but since Paul told us it was wrong, then it is. So was it Paul who got word from God on the "New List?"
What women must wear, what sex we must sleep with, etc. Circumcision, Sabbath worship? Did Paul get to relay God's "new" guidelines of Obedience to Him?
If in fact the way of showing Obedience did change. And by what Jesus did on the cross, I must say it did.

But by what Paul says, maybe it didn't. Then he add even more obedience rules.
 
Then there is a stipulation. One must endure to the end. My Church as a boy taught this stipulation. They taught this obedience was the fruit. I will agree that somehow, somewhere this has changed over time.

Didn't James show this more than Paul? I can't read Ephesians 2 though and see the Cross part of Christ's mission as being only for the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Perhaps his teaching part was while he was on the earth.

In Ephesians 2, Paul says the Gentiles were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world.

That by the blood of Jesus, Gentiles have been brought near. That Jesus brought down the wall that separated the two. That Christ made the two groups one.

Jesus did this by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees. He did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace.

Regardless of whom the wall divided, Jesus removed it. It then allowed the grafting in of Gentiles to the Commonwealth of Israel.
The only way this grafting could take place was if the law of commandments and decrees were abolished. That is why Jesus said he abolished it. Where the two could become one.

I'm not sure exactly how all this ties back in to our obedience. We still must be obedient. Romans 11 tells us if we quit believing. If we quit trusting in God, we can be removed from the grafting.

"For if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you either."


So maybe free grace doesn't exactly give us free reign. We still must be obedient. But if Jesus abolished the laws and decrees, what then is this obedience? Is it Paul's guidelines?

We are quick to say that commiting homosexuality is not being obedient to God. That we can't use the Old Testament to tell us that but since Paul told us it was wrong, then it is. So was it Paul who got word from God on the "New List?"
What women must wear, what sex we must sleep with, etc. Circumcision, Sabbath worship? Did Paul get to relay God's "new" guidelines of Obedience to Him?
If in fact the way of showing Obedience did change. And by what Jesus did on the cross, I must say it did.

But by what Paul says, maybe it didn't. Then he add even more obedience rules.
Hmmmm....according to God, His Law was perfect....and it was not to be added to or taken away from. (BTW, Jews add to the Law, Gentiles take away from it) As we know Jesus was against man's 'Dogma', which I believe is the greek work used in Collosians 2 that you may be referencing. Jesus constantly reviled the Pharisees for their traditions, which they placed over God's commands and put too much weight on people. (Matthew 23:2)
 
Thread starter #34
I'm really glad I'm not an alcoholic or homosexual. I'd really have a hard time figuring all this out.
Christianity seems to appear as a great enigma or a catch 22. On one had we are saved by grace and not works. On the other had we must produce the fruits of obedience to "prove" we received the free gift.

The free gift of salvation given not based on works. Yet works are the proof you received the gift. Obedience is the proof you received the free gift.

Continuing with an alcohol addiction or homosexuality after receiving the free gift is proof you didn't receive the free gift of salvation.

We should go so far as to shun you. But since we now think you never received salvation, we no longer have to shun you. You were a pagan all along. God never knew you. I can now sup with you again.
 
Last edited:
Thread starter #35
Hmmmm....according to God, His Law was perfect....and it was not to be added to or taken away from. (BTW, Jews add to the Law, Gentiles take away from it) As we know Jesus was against man's 'Dogma', which I believe is the greek work used in Collosians 2 that you may be referencing. Jesus constantly reviled the Pharisees for their traditions, which they placed over God's commands and put too much weight on people. (Matthew 23:2)
What are your beliefs on this verse?

Ephesians 2:15
by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees. He did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace

katargēsas
 
What are your beliefs on this verse?

Ephesians 2:15
by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees. He did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace

katargēsas
As I mentioned in the previous reply, the word that is translated "commandments" is actually "Dogma"....which was the man-made traditions and rules of the Pharisees. He (God) hated all that the rulers had added to His Law. Jesus obviously did not nail the Law to the cross as His followers were still following it 30 years later (and for centuries later as Epiphanius said that there were Nazarenes in the 4th century who were believers in Jesus but were also "fettered" by the Law. lol
 
Thread starter #37
As I mentioned in the previous reply, the word that is translated "commandments" is actually "Dogma"....which was the man-made traditions and rules of the Pharisees. He (God) hated all that the rulers had added to His Law. Jesus obviously did not nail the Law to the cross as His followers were still following it 30 years later (and for centuries later as Epiphanius said that there were Nazarenes in the 4th century who were believers in Jesus but were also "fettered" by the Law. lol
Interesting concept of that passage and the Colossians 2 passage as well. I'll have to read it a few times with the same goggles you are wearing and see if I can see it in the same light. It's possible.
 
Last edited:
Lots of problems with translation as you might suspect, especially given 2000 years of separation from the originals. I just confirmed in my Greek Interlinear (scripture4all.org) that Dogma is the greek word used there. Paul would definitely not call God's Word "Dogma". Anyway....if we never test things that we have been taught all our life, we will never realize that we've been handed down lies and errors. Most assume that they were just lucky and born into perfect truth that is handed to them from the pulpit every week. lol I, too, was there until two years ago. Hope I haven't offended any of you guys today. And, like you, a lot of this stuff sounded strange to me when I first heard about it. But, "ridicule, without research, is hypocrisy" :) I didn't grow up observing Sabbath, so it was strange to me. I grew up eating pork and thinking that Peter's Vision explained it perfectly, but now I know that Peter's Vision is the best proof that we are not to eat unclean food if we want to please God.

Anyway, really enjoyed today's conversations. Iron sharpens Iron...
 
Thread starter #39
Lots of problems with translation as you might suspect, especially given 2000 years of separation from the originals. I just confirmed in my Greek Interlinear (scripture4all.org) that Dogma is the greek word used there. Paul would definitely not call God's Word "Dogma". Anyway....if we never test things that we have been taught all our life, we will never realize that we've been handed down lies and errors. Most assume that they were just lucky and born into perfect truth that is handed to them from the pulpit every week. lol I, too, was there until two years ago. Hope I haven't offended any of you guys today. And, like you, a lot of this stuff sounded strange to me when I first heard about it. But, "ridicule, without research, is hypocrisy" :) I didn't grow up observing Sabbath, so it was strange to me. I grew up eating pork and thinking that Peter's Vision explained it perfectly, but now I know that Peter's Vision is the best proof that we are not to eat unclean food if we want to please God.

Anyway, really enjoyed today's conversations. Iron sharpens Iron...
I was wondering where you were getting the Greek interpretations for dogma or lingering shadow.

Looked at Ephesians 2:15 on Scripture4All and it did shed light on Jesus abolishing(katargēsas) in the Flesh God's Law(nomen) through commandments in the form of ordinance.(dogma)

On that site katargēsas means to nullify. So in the deeper look or delving, as you say, it does say dogma and not doctrine. Interesting.

It actually says dogma on Biblehub as well;

https://biblehub.com/lexicon/ephesians/2-15.htm

So then I guess the only thing Jesus died for in relation to removing the dividing wall mentioned in Ephesians 2 was abolishing dogma and not the actual commandments or Law of God.

Would everyone agree? Would someone like to look into it and comment?
Contained in ordinances, dogmasin , an opinion, (a public) decree
 
Top