|
Post by linsi on Jul 12, 2006 16:20:40 GMT 10
Comment: I do not think so. The mere fact that God already established the precepts of good and evil and applying His instruction to man regarding the Tree of Knowledge (good and evil) meant that God had already applied the basis of Moral law prior to man committing sin.
hello kuya banshik
i respect your opinion and perceptions about these matters, it's your opinion but if you will take a closer look at what the bible stated, there were no existing moral laws before the fall...
the precepts of good and evil is God's fore knowledge of what man will choose, because God intends his creation to be good until they were tested, those who have free will.
the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is God's omniscience, a fore knowledge of what man will choose when man fails to obey then evilness makes its own way,...
since free will was given then there must be a choice, to obey or not, when man chose to rebel or disobey, then evil came in.
therefore evil is a choice when obedience is rejected and God knew about that.
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Jul 12, 2006 16:22:03 GMT 10
Hi Linsi,
You never answered the question:
"Was free will designed by God so that man would commit sin? Or was free will designed by God in order for man to serve and love God?"
i already answered that, page1, read again.
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Jul 12, 2006 16:29:49 GMT 10
What you explained is the definition of free will but not its purpose. Even (for the sake of argument) we accept that man is inclined to sin - the prupose for which Free Will was created has to be defined.
Was free will created so man could do good or do evil?
I explained the definition and purpose of free will already, i said free will was given as a gift frrom God because he loves us. Free will must be free or else it would undermine God's love and sincerity when it is not free.
God wanted us to praise and love him for he is jealous God, by a free choice he intended man to serve him and obey him but since the choice is free, man made use of that freedom and decided to choose his fallen state.
|
|
|
Post by bangzhik101 on Jul 12, 2006 17:40:41 GMT 10
Yours: there are several kinds of laws, would you do me the honor to identify each?
Hi Linsi,
We can make the discourse simple.
It was Moral Law which was defined not other laws. I believe it is not necessary at this point except to resolve the question.
The question was simple enough which would not require any other definition of any type of Law apart from Moral law
"If Moral Law existed only after man began to sin, what law was applied by God when the fallen angels rebelled and sin?"
|
|
|
Post by bangzhik101 on Jul 12, 2006 17:47:26 GMT 10
Yours: di ba you said that angels have superior intelligence so they were judged right away when lucifer rebelled?..
there was no law indicated in the bible for angels during the time of lucifer as the morning star and since you said which i agreed that angels were created with superior intelligence so much so that the first angelic rebellion met the final judgment a punishment for them to fall and second death awaits them, that answers your question about this matter.
Hi Linsi,
The superior intellect and will of the angels attribute to their nature. However, the superiority of the angels' nature does not mean there is an absence of Law.
In fact, if you claim there is "no law indicated in the Bible" you have to explain why the fallen angels where punished anyway. How can a creature or being be punished if (a) there was no law (b) there is not written basis (Biblical verse) of the law whicih they violated.
This is the reason why I believe, that "No" your response did not anwser my question at all.
|
|
|
Post by bangzhik101 on Jul 12, 2006 17:51:08 GMT 10
Yours: God's moral law is specifically about the 10 commandments given at the mount of sinai. Hi Linsi, 10 Commandments which specifically lead man to to what Is it not the same precepts apply that the 10 Commandments lead to the question of Good and Evil ?
|
|
|
Post by bangzhik101 on Jul 12, 2006 17:54:19 GMT 10
Yours: at first there was no evil, for God created only what is good. before man was created there was no moral law because there was no sin and rebellion amongst men, similar to the angels, God created his creation which was only good.
Hi Linsi,
This is your predicament.
1. You just claimed there was no moral law until man sinned and rebelled against God similar to the angels.
2. Yet you established that men and the angels "sinned" and "rebelled" against God. If you claim it was not moral law which they violated, can you explain what "Law" was violated by both men and the angels...
|
|
|
Post by bangzhik101 on Jul 12, 2006 17:57:04 GMT 10
Yours: i respect your opinion and perceptions about these matters, it's your opinion but if you will take a closer look at what the bible stated, there were no existing moral laws before the fall...
Hi Linsi,
If you claim there was no "biblical basis" of moral law before the fall of man.
(a) Can you explain the basis on why the angels were punished?
(b) Is disobeying God "immoral"?
|
|
|
Post by bangzhik101 on Jul 12, 2006 17:58:52 GMT 10
Hi Linsi, You never answered the question: "Was free will designed by God so that man would commit sin? Or was free will designed by God in order for man to serve and love God?"
i already answered that, page1, read again.Hi Linsi, No offense meant, but your explanation is too lengthy when the question can be answered by a simple "Yes" or "No".
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Jul 12, 2006 18:00:00 GMT 10
Hi Linsi,
We can make the discourse simple.
It was Moral Law which was defined not other laws. I believe it is not necessary at this point except to resolve the question.
The question was simple enough which would not require any other definition of any type of Law apart from Moral law
"If Moral Law existed only after man began to sin, what law was applied by God when the fallen angels rebelled and sin?"
kuya banshik
mahalagang malaman kung ano ano ang laws..at ito ay nahahati lang sa tatlong major laws..
ito ay
natural law moral law at ceremonial laws...
ang mga susunod na mga laws ay derivatives na lang...
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Jul 12, 2006 18:02:11 GMT 10
kumbaga sa kulay ang primary colors ay kinukuhaan ng tints para maka produce ng secondary colors and tertiary colors, the laws are also similar to that.. the three major laws which is the natural, moral and ceremonial laws are primary laws in which all other laws wether secondary , tertiary etc, are derived from them..
mahalagang malaman ang pinagmulan ng mga batas.. at ito ay galing sa tatlong major laws lang..
|
|
|
Post by bangzhik101 on Jul 12, 2006 18:03:03 GMT 10
Yours: I explained the definition and purpose of free will already, i said free will was given as a gift frrom God because he loves us. Free will must be free or else it would undermine God's love and sincerity when it is not free.
God wanted us to praise and love him for he is jealous God, by a free choice he intended man to serve him and obey him but since the choice is free, man made use of that freedom and decided to choose his fallen state.
Hi Linsi,
Ok. Agreed tayo dito.
Q1: So if man's will is in union with God does this mean that Man would be saved?
Q2: Where would "man's will" be judged if he is in unionwith God or not and on what basis would man be judged?
Q3. Is this basis for judging man would decide wheter he would be svaed or not?
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Jul 12, 2006 18:04:01 GMT 10
It was Moral Law which was defined not other laws. I believe it is not necessary at this point except to resolve the question.
The question was simple enough which would not require any other definition of any type of Law apart from Moral law
"If Moral Law existed only after man began to sin, what law was applied by God when the fallen angels rebelled and sin?"
kuya banshik napaghahalo ninyo ang mga laws, kaya dapat i define ang bawat major or primary laws..
yung simple personal commandment kay adam at eve ay categorize ninyo na moral law which is hindi po...
you also have to define what is moral in its full context..
|
|
|
Post by bangzhik101 on Jul 12, 2006 18:06:22 GMT 10
Yours: kuya banshik
mahalagang malaman kung ano ano ang laws..at ito ay nahahati lang sa tatlong major laws..
ito ay
natural law moral law at ceremonial laws...
ang mga susunod na mga laws ay derivatives na lang...
Hi Linsi,
Again...We can make the discourse simple.
It was Moral Law which was defined not other laws. I believe it is not necessary at this point except to resolve the question.
The question was simple enough which would not require any other definition of any type of Law apart from Moral law
"If Moral Law existed only after man began to sin, what law was applied by God when the fallen angels rebelled and sin?"
Comment: I just defined the question as it pertains to "Moral Law" alone. No other type of laws were mentioned relevant to the question at hand.
|
|
|
Post by bangzhik101 on Jul 12, 2006 18:14:51 GMT 10
Yours 1: nauna po ang free will ng tao, dahil wala pang batas nun. yung bilin kay adam na wag kakain ang forbidden fruit is personal commandment not law.
Yours 2: kuya banshik napaghahalo ninyo ang mga laws, kaya dapat i define ang bawat major or primary laws..
yung simple personal commandment kay adam at eve ay categorize ninyo na moral law which is hindi po...
you also have to define what is moral in its full context..
Hi Linsi,
Your premise stated that it was "personal commandment not law".
I mentioned there is no distinction between personal commandment by God and Moral Law because both commandment and law are precepts which God instructs man to do in order to be in union with Him.
May pinagkaiba ba ang dalawa kung ang resulta for disobeying "personal commandment" and moral laws would be "sin"?
In addition, you have not yet answered the question:
"If Moral Law existed only after man began to sin, what law was applied by God when the fallen angels rebelled and sin?"
Comment: The question refers to the fallen angels not adam and eve.
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Jul 12, 2006 19:23:37 GMT 10
naiwanan ko palang naka log in meh kuya banshik maya na kita sagutin and i hope my answers will be read thoroughly kc nagpapaulit ulit kaya.,. balikan ko na lang to
and for a quick reply, magkaiba ang personal commandment at ibang iba ang moral law.. kaya dapat malaman kung ano ang moral law at ano ang mga primary laws na nag exist para hindi mapaghalo halo..
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Jul 12, 2006 23:52:37 GMT 10
I mentioned there is no distinction between personal commandment by God and Moral Law because both commandment and law are precepts which God instructs man to do in order to be in union with Him.
kuya banshik
first these were not my premises, kaya nga dapat malaman ang definitions ng mga batas dahil pinaghahalo halo mo po.
we are particularly tackling God's Law and Human Sin to trim it down to a narrower and more focused topic.
you pressumed that the law existed before the fall? so what law? moral? moral law was created after the fall and not before the fall, those were the 10 commandments stated in the bible, now if you mean natural law in relation to creation then natural law existed before the fall of man, it existed far back as creation itself, as the dictates of nature in accordance to gravitational force, light, speed and everything which deals with the natural course of nature as per creation.
ito ang sinasabi kong dapat ma distinguish naten ang mga batas na ginawa ng Diyos para hindi maghalo halo.
iba ang free will kesa sa batas
iba ang knowledge sa batas
at ano ano ba ang batas na ito?
before all of us proceed to God's moral law and human sin in particular we have to know that moral law existed only after the fall in the time of moses.
yun bang kasalanan ni lucifer ay patungkol sa morality? NO Yun bang pagkain ng forbidden fruit per se ay immoral? No
so what was God's justice then, it is for angels to fall and it is for humans to suffer the curses and die.. mnay justice na.
pero ang moral law ay na define nung panahon ni moses lang.
Moral law must be defined first before everyobody could proceed or else magiging halo halo na naman ang thread, kaya nga tinatanong ko kung ano ano ang mga klase ng batas ayon sa bibliya dahil mahalaga ito sa usapan sa thread...
Our thread is 'GOD'S LAW COULD NOT SAVE US"
therefore it is trimmed down to God's moral law and human sin.
|
|
|
Post by bangzhik101 on Jul 13, 2006 16:01:16 GMT 10
you pressumed that the law existed before the fall? so what law? moral? moral law was created after the fall and not before the fall, those were the 10 commandments stated in the bible, now if you mean natural law in relation to creation then natural law existed before the fall of man, it existed far back as creation itself, as the dictates of nature in accordance to gravitational force, light, speed and everything which deals with the natural course of nature as per creation.
Hi Linsi,
My premise was simple. There was the Law prior to the fall and it existed even before the creation of man. My reason is that because it was the Law which was the basis why the fallen angels where judged and the same Law was the basis where Adam and Eve where judge during their fall.
You said there was none. I am now asking if there is no Law prior to the fall...what was the basis wherein Adam and Eve was judged, and what was the basis in which the fallen angels were judged as well?
|
|
|
Post by bangzhik101 on Jul 13, 2006 16:04:10 GMT 10
Moral law must be defined first before everyobody could proceed or else magiging halo halo na naman ang thread, kaya nga tinatanong ko kung ano ano ang mga klase ng batas ayon sa bibliya dahil mahalaga ito sa usapan sa thread...
Our thread is 'GOD'S LAW COULD NOT SAVE US"
therefore it is trimmed down to God's moral law and human sin
Hi Linsi,
I have no issues here. But you still have not answered the core of the question. If the fallen angels where judged because of disobeying God's law and Adam and Eve were also punished for disobeying God's instruction - what is the positive effect of following God's Laws?
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Jul 13, 2006 16:17:11 GMT 10
kuya banshik
hindi ko pa ba nasasagot e puro sagot na nga
read back po, yung purpose why God's law was given..
at ang moral law ay pang huli na lang nung gawin ng Diyos..bakit hindi nyo ito matanggap e nasa bibliya at mga theology books
at kung ang God's law ay makakapag ligtas ENDE NA KELANGAN SI KRISTO kc may batas na GAYA NG GINAGAWA NG MGA SABADISTA AT JEWISH RELIGIONS, SAVE NA no need for Christ
|
|
ruth
Moderator
moderator in her designated rooms
Posts: 903
|
Post by ruth on Jul 26, 2006 19:31:25 GMT 10
kuya B:
Hi Linsi,
I have no issues here. But you still have not answered the core of the question. If the fallen angels where judged because of disobeying God's law and Adam and Eve were also punished for disobeying God's instruction - what is the positive effect of following God's Laws?
ruth:
makikisingit lang po hano?
lilinawin ko muna po kung ano ang topic...this is about God's MORAL LAWS (as in 10 commandments or the Mosaic Law) can not save us.
hindi po God's Law can not save the angels and Adam and EVE.
Tama po ang tanong mo kuya B., kung hindi nga existent ang Moral Law before the Fall, what kind of law was applicable to the angels and Adam and Eve before the Fall....kaso lang kuya B., ibang topic ito.
|
|
ruth
Moderator
moderator in her designated rooms
Posts: 903
|
Post by ruth on Jul 26, 2006 19:42:46 GMT 10
kuya B:
what is the positive effects of following God's laws?
ruth:
ideally there would be peace and order on earth. wala na sanang kahirapan, walang kasalanan, walang gulo. maganda sana kung masusunod nga ng lahat.
ang kaso, nasusunod ba?
and if ever there would come a time na bawat isang utos ay nasusunod na nga, is there a need for us to be with Jesus in the kingdom He promised to us?
kung babalik tayo sa 4 gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the Pharisees were pious and religious and they try so hard to follow the law. even to the point of not eating meat which is considered unclean, they dont even take a bath during the Sabbath.
and these pios and religious and morally upright are the very ones who reject that Jesus is Christ or the Messiah.
Kasi maski si Jesus di sumunod sa Law nila na no healing during the Sabbath.
at kung mapapansin nyo po Jesus is closer to the sinners of that time (Mary Magdalen, Matthew the tax collector, the rich young ruler, even the lepers considered unclean by the Jews)...mas binibigyan Nya ng importance ang mga taong makasalanan ..yung mga taong alam na sila ay makasalanan at nangaganilangan ng GRACE ng DYos upang sila ay mapatawad.
Samantalang ang mga Pharisees na nagpupumilit maging perfect at sumunod sa Mosaic Law, tingin nila sa sarili nila ay napakalinis...kaya wala ng lugar sa puso at isipan nila sa paghingi ng kapatawaran sa kasalanan.
Alalahanin po natin na ang purpose ni Jesus sa pagbaba sa lupa ay para isave ang mga MAKASALANAN....at hindi ang mga morally upright.
nung may nagtanong kay Jesus which is easier, healing the physically sick or the spiritually sick....sinabi Nya na mas madaling pagalinging ang physically sick for it does not require Faith..no need for RESPONSE...but for healing the spiritually sick...meron RESPONSE na kelangan.
|
|
ruth
Moderator
moderator in her designated rooms
Posts: 903
|
Post by ruth on Jul 26, 2006 19:47:01 GMT 10
Jesus gave us FREE WILL to accept or reject Him. He even made it easier for us to reject Him by showing Himself us a suffering Messiah.
Sya na walang kasalanan 'sinless', at sumusunod sa batas ni God (Moral Law which applies to Him when He walked the earth as MAN)....ay nag-suffer pa din..mas dapat na Sya ang magtanong ng 'what is the positive effect of following God's Laws?'
|
|
ruth
Moderator
moderator in her designated rooms
Posts: 903
|
Post by ruth on Jul 26, 2006 19:54:01 GMT 10
mas gusto ni Jesus ang company ng mga sinners, for when He forgave them of their SINS, they readily accepted Him as Christ and Loved Him in Response to His grace..
pero yung mga sumusunod sa Law, sila ay mapagmataas...
so what is the positive effect, aside from a temporary social and political order?
may positive effect ang pag-sunod sa batas, pero ito po ay temporary lang.
it goes back to the nature of man of being sinful.
|
|
ruth
Moderator
moderator in her designated rooms
Posts: 903
|
Post by ruth on Jul 26, 2006 20:18:22 GMT 10
Jesus knows that He can not win Us by ruling us with FEAR or with LAWS..
Jesus knows that He can win us through LOVE..kasi mas permanent ito kesa sa FEAR..
When we respond to Christ out of Love, and we follow the Law because we do not want to hurt Him...mas mabilis ang paghingi natin ng tawad...
we follow the Law because we do not want to Hurt Him..and since we are sinners by nature we will always strive to remain in Him, and thus following tha Law is almost transparent,,di mo na napapansin na sumusunod ka na pala, by just following God out of love.
|
|
ruth
Moderator
moderator in her designated rooms
Posts: 903
|
Post by ruth on Jul 26, 2006 20:39:36 GMT 10
kuya banshik
hindi ko pa ba nasasagot e puro sagot na nga
read back po, yung purpose why God's law was given..
at ang moral law ay pang huli na lang nung gawin ng Diyos..bakit hindi nyo ito matanggap e nasa bibliya at mga theology books
at kung ang God's law ay makakapag ligtas ENDE NA KELANGAN SI KRISTO kc may batas na GAYA NG GINAGAWA NG MGA SABADISTA AT JEWISH RELIGIONS, SAVE NA no need for Christ
totoo ito Linsi, may nabasa ako dati na book ni Philip Yancey, The JEsus I never knew... meron daw isang Jewish author na highly acclaims Jesus as a teacher, but not as a Savior... wala daw sya problem sa teachings ni Jesus...as it helps them keep the Law...but to think of Him as The MEssiah, or The Savior...medyo mahirap daw tanggapin. They Know Jesus, but not Jesus Christ. They believe in Jesus, but does not Have Faith in Him.
|
|
|
Post by hottyfecehh on Jul 27, 2006 0:34:25 GMT 10
ganda ng paliwanagan dito sa God's LAW ah..Very impressed ako sa sagot ng dalwang babae sa taas...
|
|
ruth
Moderator
moderator in her designated rooms
Posts: 903
|
Post by ruth on Jul 27, 2006 13:00:59 GMT 10
hotty,
marami ka rin magagandang posts. we are all learning from each other. I also appreciate Kuya B's honest replies, I am also learning from him.
He posts questions that I myself would have asked.
If I had lived during the time when Jesus was being persecuted by the Jews, I may have been in the sidelines either as an spectator or a critic kung hindi ako isa sa napatawan ng grace ng kapatawaran (like Mary Magdalene or Peter)...if I were forgiven and yet remained guilty of my sins, I might have committed suicide (like Judas) dahil sa sobrang hiya.
Maganda po na tayo ay naguusap-usap dahil even Jesus himself (when He was walking on earth as Man), asked for the company of His disciples, when He was waiting for His persecution.
Sya man ay nalungkot at nangailangan ng kasama. He who Saves ay nakaramdam ng sakit, ng kalungkutan at pagkaapi. He who Saves cannot even save Himself from being crucified.
Paano pa kaya tayo maisave ng Law?
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Oct 14, 2006 4:34:32 GMT 10
If God's law could not save man, therefore the law is futile.
|
|
|
Post by Always on Dec 25, 2006 12:51:50 GMT 10
If God's law could not save man, therefore the law is futile.
If a person can not pass a bar exam, does it mean that the exam is futile
|
|