The Book of Romans the LDS refuse to heed

[_subgenius]

...(snip)...Again, no where in my posts have I stated that the principles of the law are abolished...only the believers' subjection to it for salvation....that is what I am talking about.

goalpost moving duly noted...but, in fact, you clearly stated that the Mosaic Covenant (Law) had been fulfilled....so why would it still be around...except you claim that only some of it need be around...that somehow time and mankind have been able to determine which "Laws" are really applicable...which ones God is still serious about...and which ones He is not serious about.

So, if the Law is now only a "suggestion" then what possible purpose would it serve by being maintained? what possible reason can you assert that would justify anyone adhering to just one of the "excepted" 10 commandments?
If salvation receives no influence from any and all "Laws" then why do insist that some of them are still in force at all?


i have not claimed that Christ did/did not abolish the Law of the Prophets, etc.

Perhaps you could provide a scriptural reference that illuminates your position that the Mosaic Covenant (Law) has been fulfilled except for the 10 commandments ? That Christ has rendered all previous commandments null and void except the 10 commandments....we will all eagerly await your citation.

should be simple, correct?

[_Albion]

Are you really suggesting that the law was not fullfilled in Christ? The Bible would suggest otherwise...including words directly attributed to Jesus.

[_subgenius]

...(snip)...Again, no where in my posts have I stated that the principles of the law are abolished...only the believers' subjection to it for salvation....that is what I am talking about.

goalpost moving duly noted...but, in fact, you clearly stated that the Mosaic Covenant (Law) had been fulfilled....so why would it still be around...except you claim that only some of it need be around...that somehow time and mankind have been able to determine which "Laws" are really applicable...which ones God is still serious about...and which ones He is not serious about.

So, if the Law is now only a "suggestion" then what possible purpose would it serve by being maintained? what possible reason can you assert that would justify anyone adhering to just one of the "excepted" 10 commandments?
If salvation receives no influence from any and all "Laws" then why do insist that some of them are still in force at all?


i have not claimed that Christ did/did not abolish the Law of the Prophets, etc.

Perhaps you could provide a scriptural reference that illuminates your position that the Mosaic Covenant (Law) has been fulfilled except for the 10 commandments ? That Christ has rendered all previous commandments null and void except the 10 commandments....we will all eagerly await your citation.

should be simple, correct?

BUMP for Albion

[_Albion]

Are you really suggesting that the law was not fullfilled in Christ? The Bible would suggest otherwise...including words directly attributed to Jesus.

B ump for subgenius.

[_subgenius]

Are you really suggesting that the law was not fullfilled in Christ? The Bible would suggest otherwise...including words directly attributed to Jesus.

B ump for subgenius.

nice dodge (again)
but
i have not suggested anything....simply asked you simple questions that you refuse to answer

your concession is duly noted

[_Albion]

I do not intend to respond claims of what you think, wish, twist or otherwise misinterpret from my posts. I will also not respond to the many tangents you introduce in that process. If that is interpreted by you as dodging then so be it...I am not responsible for your obvious ego needs. If you do not accept the Bible as the ultimate word then we have little basis on which to discuss...though I am not sure discussion is what you really want. In the meantime I suggest a good dictionary to look up the word fulfill as to its meaning. The best I know is the Oxford which includes these definitions "1: achieve or realise (something desired, promised, or predicted. 2. satisfy or meet." Definitions fully in keeping with what I have really presented.

[_Tobin]

I do not intend to respond claims of what you think, wish, twist or otherwise misinterpret from my posts. I will also not respond to the many tangents you introduce in that process. If that is interpreted by you as dodging then so be it...I am not responsible for your obvious ego needs. If you do not accept the Bible as the ultimate word then we have little basis on which to discuss...though I am not sure discussion is what you really want. In the meantime I suggest a good dictionary to look up the word fulfill as to its meaning. The best I know is the Oxford which includes these definitions "1: achieve or realise (something desired, promised, or predicted. 2. satisfy or meet." Definitions fully in keeping with what I have really presented.

In other words, Albion doesn't feel the need to explain himself or his baseless assertions. We just have to take his word for it that his is the only true understanding of Christianity, Mormonism, the Bible, and so on. And if he wishes to discuss something, he'll let us know. Otherwise, he'll just require his critics to read the dictionary or other general reference material instead.