dog-on

That's the catholic take, but paying the ticket does not absolve one from obeying the speed limit next time out.

On the other hand, removing the speed limit itself does.

spin

It's Paul's take. The basic argument that runs through Galatians. If you want to stick to the law, then christ's death has no significance to you. Sticking to the law means doing the law, not living by faith, which is Paul's bandwagon. He says, "if justification comes through the law, then christ died for nothing." (Gal 2:21b)

dog-on

It is Paul's take that is confusing, as he seems to have two:

1. Substitutional atonement for sin.

2. Redemption from the curse of the law.

These are not the same thing.

Andykiwi

Some thoughts I have...

Did he only redeem from the Jewish law? If so, of what consequence is that to anyone not under Jewish law?

If he dies for all sin because that was the God's requirement, why is it necessary for people to believe it? What difference is believing supposed to make? Did he die for sin or not?

Seriously though, I think the doctrine was designed simply to free people (Jews) from the need to make animal sacrifices. "Paul" understood that that was not necessary and found a way to get people over it.

stephan huller

It was only the Jewish law and it demonstrates that Paul was directing his message at Jewish proselytes as the Marcionites themselves claimed (Against Marcion Book 3). The Catholic tradition that he was the apostle to the Gentiles is a later development which doesn't make any sense as you have just pointed out for us.

judge

Romans 14

"and everything that does not come from faith is sin"

Thing is we can make Paul say many things if we wish.

aa5874

When did "Paul" find a way to get Jews over animal sacrifices? The Pauline writings are fairy tales.

The Pauline writings played ZERO role or had ZERO influence on Jewish Laws concerning animal sacrifices in the 1st century before the Fall of the Jewish Temple based on the writings of non-apologetic sources.

spin

I thought I'd already responded to this:

1. What: Redemption from the curse of the law.

2. How: Substitutional atonement for sin.

Let's add, though it should be entailed:

3. Condition: Faith, ie as long as one has faith, redemption is applicable.

dog-on

I suppose so, though it still doesn't sit well. It seems like conditional freedom, which is no freedom at all.

spin

I'd say all freedoms are conditioned.

• Prison freedom: you can go anywhere in the yard you like.
• Burn Notice freedom: you can do whatever you like, but you have no papers so you can't work.
• Educational freedom: you can study whatever you like, as long as it is on the curriculum, you follow the preferred methods and you have the correct prerequisites.
• School freedom: you can do whatever you like, as long as you realize you are just children, so no adult behavior.
• Parental freedom: you can do whatever you like, but no sex or drugs or rock and roll.
• Social freedom: you can do whatever the society thinks is ok.
• Existence freedom: you can do whatever you can, while stuck in a specific gravitational situation, needing a specific oxygen concoction to breathe, functioning on dead life forms.
• Etc.

It's really all prison freedom.