I know it is probably difficult for you to focus, but perhaps you could try to interact with what I have written and not continue to rail against a belief you seem intent on imputing to me unjustly.
paulspassingthoughts said, on February 15, 2014 at 3:19 PM
Further, your concession that people who hold different philosophies cannot debate the rational merits of those philosophies is proof of your devotion to rank mysticism. Since I haven’t been given the “grace to perceive ” like you have, discussion with me is futile . This totally proves my point. If your beliefs truly had any rational basis, there would be no excuse nor reason for eschewing discussions with ANYBODY. Your theology is completely rooted in who wins God’s epistemological lottery. Truth is merely who God decides to magically enlighten . People have to agree with you BEFORE they can believe you. Agreement with you is the single greatest evidence of one’s “salvation ” and “illumination”.
Randy, I know exactly what you believe. I have heard this a thousand times before. You are not particularly unique, and I’ve never considered you thus.
Basically, you lived it for several years under, CJ?
The issue between us is not primarily illumination but revelation. I believe we can know nothing of God and his purposes apart from revelation. Of course, my authority for that is the N.T. Scripture which you don’t accept as inerrant.
You seem to be a bit off topic but I will try to answer your question. The overarching law of God is love to God and neighbor. The ways in which such love is expressed is expressed differently under different covenants. For example, under the old covenant, eating ham would have given evidence that a person failed to love God. We may eat ham freely now, not because God has changed but because there has been a change of covenant. That same overarching and unchanging law is expressed in the New Testament Scriptures as the law of Christ. None of the righteous requirements of the old covenant law have changed. It is still wrong to have other gods, kill steal, commit adultery etc.
paulspassingthoughts said, on February 15, 2014 at 6:01 PM
Another classic Reformed response when they are getting painted into a corner that they can’t get out of, “You’re ‘off topic'” You guys bore me to death with the same old crap. But Randy, you said that the Ten Commandments were abrogated because it was a covenant made with Israel, now you are saying that some of those laws are applicable–which is it?
The short answer is God’s law is love God and your neighbor. The ways we are to obey that law are different under different covenants. Most of the requirements of the old covenant are repeated in the NT Scriptures as the law of Christ.
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
You can’t find a single post either here or on my blog where I have stated that authority resides in ” a spiritual hierarchy.” Randy
Well, duh. Authority resides in hierarchy. Can you have a ladder without rungs? Who are you trying to fool?
LikeLike
A Mom,
I know it is probably difficult for you to focus, but perhaps you could try to interact with what I have written and not continue to rail against a belief you seem intent on imputing to me unjustly.
LikeLike
Basically, you lived it for several years under, CJ?
LikeLike
Paul,
Find it and show me. I don’t believe that and would have no reason to make such a statement.
LikeLike
Randy, don’t skirt the bigger issue: Does the Ten Commandments apply to today’s Christian? Yes or no.
LikeLike
I don’t understand the C.J.? Was that intended for me?
LikeLike
Argo,
The issue between us is not primarily illumination but revelation. I believe we can know nothing of God and his purposes apart from revelation. Of course, my authority for that is the N.T. Scripture which you don’t accept as inerrant.
LikeLike
Our discussion on law is going to make Argo’s point.
LikeLike
No. The eternal law of God is our binding authority. The Ten Commandments are the covenant God made with
Israel.
LikeLike
Randy, let me set aside Eph 6:1-3 for now and ask what exactly the “eternal law of God” is.
LikeLike
You seem to be a bit off topic but I will try to answer your question. The overarching law of God is love to God and neighbor. The ways in which such love is expressed is expressed differently under different covenants. For example, under the old covenant, eating ham would have given evidence that a person failed to love God. We may eat ham freely now, not because God has changed but because there has been a change of covenant. That same overarching and unchanging law is expressed in the New Testament Scriptures as the law of Christ. None of the righteous requirements of the old covenant law have changed. It is still wrong to have other gods, kill steal, commit adultery etc.
LikeLike
Another classic Reformed response when they are getting painted into a corner that they can’t get out of, “You’re ‘off topic'” You guys bore me to death with the same old crap. But Randy, you said that the Ten Commandments were abrogated because it was a covenant made with Israel, now you are saying that some of those laws are applicable–which is it?
LikeLike
Paul,
I posted a reply to your question. I assume it will show up at some point.
LikeLike
The short answer is God’s law is love God and your neighbor. The ways we are to obey that law are different under different covenants. Most of the requirements of the old covenant are repeated in the NT Scriptures as the law of Christ.
LikeLike
LOL, here we go with the “The short answer is…blah, blah, blah.” So Randy, how is obedience to the law different in the OT from that of the NT?
LikeLike
And Randy, if Christ fulfilled all of the law, why do we have to keep any of it?
LikeLike
Randy: do you believe we can please God by keeping the law?
LikeLike