What does Paul mean, when he says

[Elijah John]

Romans 14.33

..for whatever is not of faith is sin.

What does this mean? Is everything a person does during the course of a day a matter of faith? Are mundane activities "of faith"? If not, are mundane things "sin"?

[shnarkle]

[Replying to post 82 by brianbbs67]
Thing
Paul stated that they weren't allowed to because circumcised. That was the first thing required to move from God fearer to full heirs. It was against the Law to participate in many of the requirements of the Law in an uncircumcised state.

Why would Paul forbid circumcision and still have taught that the rest of the Law was applicable as you seem determined to have us believe?

Paul didn't forbid circumcision. He pointe out that no one was justified by keeping any of the law. That is what the context is pointing out in almost every example. There is also no point in getting circumcised if one is incapable of keeping the law to begin with. Paul also makes this distinction, and points out that no one can keep God's commandments with just the unaided will. Will and effort are useless Rom. 9:16

[brianbbs67]

[Replying to post 99 by brianbbs67]

What did Paul do in Jerusalem at the Disciples request? And why did he lie about to the Galatians? What truth in Paul's Gospel would be compromised by giving in?

And from what do the believers have freedom from that the Jews wish to enslave them with?


Galatians 2:1-6 New International Version (NIV)

Paul Accepted by the Apostles
2 Then after fourteen years, I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. 2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain. 3 Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. 4 This matter arose because some false believers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. 5 We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.

6 As for those who were held in high esteem—whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not show favoritism—they added nothing to my message.

Paul took a vow or just paid the expenses of those men taking a vow(probably the Nazarite vow). It was a public show, requested by Peter, to show the church he did not teach against the law. Peter said he believed Paul but many twisted his words. Paul always claimed to teach the law and prophets. Every time he was confronted. Paul claimed to teach CHrist's gospel and James and Peter believed him. Even when Paul and Peter disagreed. So, are you saying Paul is a lier? If so, why should we listen at all?

If Paul taught against Christ, we should we regard him at all? I don't think Paul did. I think his words are twisted to let one believe he changed Jesus' mission. Paul said he did not.

The Liberty we have as followers of Christ is freedom from the law of sin and death, the punishment of breaking the law, the handwritings of the ordinances against us, the curse of the law. Do you remember God saying He placed before Isreal a blessing and a curse? Follow and receive blessings , disobey and be cursed.

What Christ calls us to follow is his example. He followed and taught to follow the law as God gave it. Not the thousands a traditions and rules given by man(pharisees and priests). We follow it now out of respect for God(we should still try to be sinless). What did Paul say we should do with this new freedom? "Should we then, sin? Heavens no!"

[shnarkle]

[Replying to post 99 by brianbbs67]

What did Paul do in Jerusalem at the Disciples request? And why did he lie about to the Galatians? What truth in Paul's Gospel would be compromised by giving in?

And from what do the believers have freedom from that the Jews wish to enslave them with?


Galatians 2:1-6 New International Version (NIV)

Paul Accepted by the Apostles
2 Then after fourteen years, I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. 2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain. 3 Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. 4 This matter arose because some false believers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. 5 We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.

6 As for those who were held in high esteem—whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not show favoritism—they added nothing to my message.

Paul took a vow or just paid the expenses of those men taking a vow(probably the Nazarite vow). It was a public show, requested by Peter, to show the church he did not teach against the law. Peter said he believed Paul but many twisted his words. Paul always claimed to teach the law and prophets. Every time he was confronted. Paul claimed to teach CHrist's gospel and James and Peter believed him. Even when Paul and Peter disagreed. So, are you saying Paul is a lier? If so, why should we listen at all?

If Paul taught against Christ, we should we regard him at all? I don't think Paul did. I think his words are twisted to let one believe he changed Jesus' mission. Paul said he did not.

The Liberty we have as followers of Christ is freedom from the law of sin and death, the punishment of breaking the law, the handwritings of the ordinances against us, the curse of the law. Do you remember God saying He placed before Isreal a blessing and a curse? Follow and receive blessings , disobey and be cursed.

What Christ calls us to follow is his example. He followed and taught to follow the law as God gave it. Not the thousands a traditions and rules given by man(pharisees and priests). We follow it now out of respect for God(we should still try to be sinless). What did Paul say we should do with this new freedom? "Should we then, sin? Heavens no!"

We do not follow tbe law out of respect for God. That is no different than the conditions of the old Testament. The new covenant enables the new creature in Christ to keep the law because God has created them for that purpose. Jer.31:33;Ezek.11:19;36:26; Heb.8:9,10