|

|
|
|
Posts: 706
Joined: May 2016
|
|
|
|
Forums31
Topics8,348
Posts56,544
Members992
| |
Most Online2,383 Jan 12th, 2026
|
|
|
#10489
Thu Feb 12, 2004 1:26 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,025 Likes: 274
Head Honcho
|
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,025 Likes: 274 |
Mr Potts, Again I say, you are corrupting what Paul was inspired to write in his Epistle to the Galatians, the purpose of which was to combat and refute the heresy of the Judaisers who taught that faith must be mixed with the keeping of the ceremonial law (you must become a Jew) with faith in order to be justified. He is NOT presenting a case for a sanctification without conformity to the moral law of God. The text itself is more than clear that the focus is upon justification by faith alone, apart from the works of the law.
I give you Dr. William Hendriksen's excellent exegesis and commentary, in part, on Gal 3:10-12.
10. For as many as rely on law-works are under a curse; for it is written: “Cursed (is) everyone who does not continue in all the things that are written in the book of the law, to do them.” This is a modified quotation from Deut. 27:26, which, according to the Hebrew reads: “Cursed (is) he who does not confirm the words of this law, to do them.” In the Old Testament these words form the conclusion of the chapter that contains the curses that were to be pronounced from Mt. Ebal after the children of Israel would have passed over the Jordan. Now the curse which the law here pronounces is very real. Unless this be granted Gal. 3:13 will be meaningless. Nevertheless, it is a fact, often ignored, that in Deuteronomy not only the blessing which was to be shouted from Mt. Gerizim but also the curse occurs in a setting of love, the idea being that by means of proclamation of this blessing and curse Israel, tenderly addressed as “the people of Jehovah thy God!,” shall live a consecrated life to the glory of their merciful Deliverer. Paul’s intentional departure from the Hebrew text when he writes, “the book of the law” may have been occasioned by his desire to emphasize the thought that the entire law, with all its precepts, considered! as a unity, is meant. His reference to “everyone” and to “all the things” reminds one of the LXX rendering: “Cursed (is) every man who does not continue in all the words of this law, to do them.” But these changes are not of an essential nature.
Now what was really the purpose of God’s law? God gave his law in order that man, by nature a child of wrath, and thus lying under the curse (Gal. 3:13) ,as definitely declared in Deut. 27:26; John 3:36; Eph. 3:2, might be reminded not only of his unchanged obligation to live in perfect harmony with this law (Lev. 19:2) , but also of his total inability to fulfil this obligation (Rom. 7:24). [That total inability is brought to light even more sharply when the law is interpreted in its true, inner meaning. Thus Jesus showed that, in order to qualify as a murderer, being angry with one’s brother would suffice, while similarly the lustful glance would suffice to make one an adulterer (Matt. 5:21-48)] Thus this law would serve as a custodian to conduct the sinner to Christ (Gal. 3:24; cf. Rom. 7:25) , in order that, having been saved by grace, he might, in principle, live the life of gratitude. That life is one of freedom in harmony with God’s law (Gal. 5:13, 14). However, the Judiaizers were perverting this true purpose of the law. They were relying on law-works as a means of salvation. On that basis they would fail forever, and Deut. 27:26, when interpreted in that framework, pronounced God’s heavy and unmitigated curse upon them; yes, curse, not blessing. The law condemns, works wrath (Rom. 4:15; 5:16, 18).
11. The fact that the opponents were diverting the law from its true purpose and that this attempt was bound to result in tragic failure is brought out clearly, as Paul continues: Now it is evident that by law no one is justified before God, for “The righteous shall live by faith.” The law has no power to subdue man’s sinful tendencies. It cannot destroy the power of sin within man (Rom. 8:3). How then can a sinner ever attain to the ultimate blessing of being righteous in the sight of God? How can that true, rich, full life in which man is at peace with his Maker, and abides in sweet communion with him, ever be reached? The answer, which holds for both dispensations, the old and the new, and for people of every race or nationality, whether Gentile or Jew, is this: “The righteous shall live by faith.” It is the man who has placed his entire confidence in God, trusting him implicitly, and accepting with gladness of heart the gracious provision which that merciful Father has made for his salvation, it is he, he alone, who shall live. This living consists in such things as: a. enjoying the peace of God which passes all understanding (Phil. 4:7), in the knowledge that in the sight of God’s holy majesty the believer is righteous (Rom. 5:1; 8:15) b. having fellowship with God “in Christ” (John 17:3); c. “rejoicing greatly with joy unspeakable and full of glory” (I Peter 1 :8); d. “being transformed into the image of the Lord! from glory to glory” (II Cor. 3:18); and e., last but not least, striving to be a spiritual blessing to others to the glory of God (I Thess. 3:8)
12. Continued: But the law does not belong to faith; on the contrary, “He who does them shall live by them.” In its own setting the included quotation from the book of Leviticus (18:5) is beautiful and comforting. It is introduced as follows: “Speak to the children of Israel and say to them, I am Jehovah y o u r God” (verse 2). This encouraging assurance is repeated in verse 4, and is followed by “Y o u must therefore keep my statutes and my ordinances; which, if a man do, he shall live by them: I am Jehovah” (verse 5).. In summary this means: “As y o u r sovereign God I have a right to order y o u to keep my statutes, and as y o u r faithful and loving God I will help and strengthen y o u to observe these statutes out of gratitude.” So interpreted, observing God’s law is the believer’s joy. Did not the Psalmist exclaim: ‘O how I love thy law! It is my meditation all the day”?
However, when one begins to “rely on law-works” (Gal. 3:10), as if such obedience to law amounts to a ticket of admission into the kingdom of heaven—and that, after all, is the context here in Galatians—he should bear in mind that, so conceived, law is the very opposite of faith. The two cannot be combined. Leaning on law means leaning on self. Exercising faith means leaning on Christ. As avenues by which men attempt to obtain salvation the two simply do not mix. They are thoroughly antagonistic. Paul himself supplies the best commentary: “But when the kindness of God our Savior and his love toward man appeared, he saved us, not by virtue of works which we ourselves had performed in a (state of) righteousness, but according to his mercy through the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit” (Titus 3:4, 5). Cf. John 1:17. Those who expect to be justified by observing all the statutes and ordinances of the law should remember that “He who does them shall live by them.” They are even more foolish than those who imagine that they can quench their thirst by drinking salt water. Lev. 18:5 now becomes their accuser, but that is their fault! In His Grace,
simul iustus et peccator
|
|
|
|
|
Entire Thread
|
...The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Sun Jan 25, 2004 10:05 AM
|
Re: ...The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Mon Jan 26, 2004 11:59 AM
|
Re: ...The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Jan 29, 2004 8:14 AM
|
Re: ...The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Fri Jan 30, 2004 8:05 AM
|
Re: ...The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Pilgrim
|
Fri Jan 30, 2004 1:42 PM
|
Re: ...The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Sat Jan 31, 2004 1:24 PM
|
The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
William
|
Sat Jan 31, 2004 3:37 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Pilgrim
|
Sat Jan 31, 2004 3:56 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
William
|
Sat Jan 31, 2004 4:36 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Pilgrim
|
Sat Jan 31, 2004 4:57 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Sat Jan 31, 2004 6:27 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
William
|
Sat Jan 31, 2004 6:54 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Sat Jan 31, 2004 7:29 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Sat Jan 31, 2004 6:29 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 3:27 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Ruth
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 5:02 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 6:16 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Pilgrim
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 6:26 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Ruth
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 10:53 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Pilgrim
|
Mon Feb 02, 2004 1:37 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 03, 2004 9:09 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Pilgrim
|
Tue Feb 03, 2004 3:01 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 03, 2004 5:51 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Pilgrim
|
Tue Feb 03, 2004 6:17 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 1:16 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 9:10 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 9:40 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 9:51 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Pilgrim
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 1:23 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 1:46 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Pilgrim
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 4:27 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 2:27 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 6:52 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 9:30 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 11:08 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Wed Feb 11, 2004 12:37 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Wed Feb 11, 2004 9:07 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Wed Feb 11, 2004 9:44 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Pilgrim
|
Wed Feb 11, 2004 1:12 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Wed Feb 11, 2004 1:30 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Wes
|
Wed Feb 11, 2004 3:46 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 8:08 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 8:53 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Pilgrim
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 5:26 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Wes
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 5:34 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Fri Feb 13, 2004 7:58 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:45 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Fri Feb 13, 2004 7:24 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Pilgrim
|
Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:40 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Fri Feb 13, 2004 10:49 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Pilgrim
|
Fri Feb 13, 2004 11:23 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 12:54 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:00 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:54 AM
|
Luther's view
|
Anonymous
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 2:52 PM
|
Re: Luther's view
|
Anonymous
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 4:00 PM
|
Just curious Mark
|
Anonymous
|
Sun Feb 15, 2004 5:16 PM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Anonymous
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 9:14 AM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Anonymous
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 9:37 AM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Anonymous
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 1:35 PM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Anonymous
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 1:49 PM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Pilgrim
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 5:43 PM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 17, 2004 8:37 AM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Pilgrim
|
Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:43 PM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 17, 2004 11:24 PM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Anonymous
|
Wed Feb 18, 2004 9:13 AM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Pilgrim
|
Wed Feb 18, 2004 12:45 PM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Anonymous
|
Wed Feb 18, 2004 1:17 PM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Anonymous
|
Wed Feb 18, 2004 2:32 PM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Pilgrim
|
Wed Feb 18, 2004 4:28 PM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 19, 2004 10:36 AM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Pilgrim
|
Wed Feb 18, 2004 4:20 PM
|
Re: Progressive Sanctification
|
Stucco
|
Wed Feb 18, 2004 4:43 PM
|
Re: Progressive Sanctification
|
Anonymous
|
Wed Feb 18, 2004 9:50 PM
|
Re: Progressive Sanctification
|
Pilgrim
|
Wed Feb 18, 2004 10:35 PM
|
Re: Progressive Sanctification
|
Anonymous
|
Wed Feb 18, 2004 11:33 PM
|
Re: Progressive Sanctification
|
Wes
|
Thu Feb 19, 2004 12:15 AM
|
Re: Progressive Sanctification
|
DaveVan3
|
Thu Feb 19, 2004 1:16 AM
|
Re: Progressive Sanctification
|
Wes
|
Thu Feb 19, 2004 1:34 AM
|
Re: Progressive Sanctification
|
Pilgrim
|
Thu Feb 19, 2004 2:06 AM
|
Re: Progressive Sanctification
|
Anonymous
|
Wed Feb 18, 2004 11:05 PM
|
Re: Progressive Sanctification
|
Stucco
|
Thu Feb 19, 2004 3:27 AM
|
Re: Progressive Sanctification
|
Wes
|
Thu Feb 19, 2004 7:38 PM
|
The Just Shall Live By Faith
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 19, 2004 9:27 AM
|
Re: The Just Shall Live By Faith
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 19, 2004 10:57 AM
|
Re: The Just Shall Live By Faith
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 19, 2004 2:45 PM
|
Re: The Just Shall Live By Faith
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 19, 2004 2:53 PM
|
Re: The Just Shall Live By Faith
|
Pilgrim
|
Thu Feb 19, 2004 3:43 PM
|
Re: The Just Shall Live By Faith
|
Anonymous
|
Fri Feb 20, 2004 9:08 AM
|
Re: The Just Shall Live By Faith
|
Anonymous
|
Fri Feb 20, 2004 12:28 AM
|
Re: The Just Shall Live By Faith
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 19, 2004 4:38 PM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Saved_n_kept
|
Wed Feb 18, 2004 4:52 PM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 19, 2004 9:20 AM
|
Re: Just curious Mark
|
Wes
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 5:38 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
CovenantInBlood
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 2:07 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 1:09 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 1:29 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Saved_n_kept
|
Fri Feb 13, 2004 11:10 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Fri Feb 13, 2004 11:34 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
CovenantInBlood
|
Fri Feb 13, 2004 11:37 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 12:29 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
CovenantInBlood
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 12:34 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Saved_n_kept
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 6:46 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Wes
|
Fri Feb 13, 2004 7:57 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:27 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Tom
|
Fri Feb 13, 2004 10:15 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Wes
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 3:12 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
MarieP
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 3:12 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 3:33 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 10:31 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 1:14 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 17, 2004 2:30 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Saved_n_kept
|
Tue Feb 17, 2004 8:38 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 17, 2004 9:53 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Wes
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 5:31 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Ruth
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 6:50 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Wes
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:16 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Tom
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:27 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Wes
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:46 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Tom
|
Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:24 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Mar 04, 2004 11:31 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Wes
|
Thu Mar 04, 2004 12:03 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Mar 04, 2004 12:10 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Fri May 21, 2004 6:57 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
grace2U
|
Fri May 21, 2004 8:25 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Fri May 21, 2004 6:07 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Pilgrim
|
Fri May 21, 2004 6:29 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Mon May 24, 2004 1:48 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Tom
|
Mon May 24, 2004 1:57 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:36 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
MarieP
|
Wed Aug 18, 2004 3:21 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Henry
|
Fri Aug 20, 2004 4:41 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
MarieP
|
Fri Aug 20, 2004 11:41 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 17, 2004 9:00 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Wes
|
Tue Feb 17, 2004 2:36 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 17, 2004 2:56 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Wes
|
Wed Feb 18, 2004 1:01 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Wes
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 5:44 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 8:03 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 9:05 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Pilgrim
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:20 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:31 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Pilgrim
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:39 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:45 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:49 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 11:01 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 12:25 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 12:46 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 12:52 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 1:11 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 1:27 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 1:31 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 2:13 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 2:20 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 2:30 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 2:43 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 2:57 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 2:15 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:37 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 17, 2004 12:04 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Feb 17, 2004 7:57 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Thu Feb 12, 2004 2:50 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Fri Feb 13, 2004 4:38 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Fri Feb 13, 2004 8:53 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 4:53 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Sun Feb 15, 2004 12:08 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Sun Feb 15, 2004 9:10 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Fri Feb 13, 2004 5:48 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 1:23 AM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 4:45 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
MarieP
|
Tue Feb 10, 2004 10:44 PM
|
Re: The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Wed Feb 11, 2004 12:06 AM
|
Law and Liberty, Law and Gospel
|
MarieP
|
Sat Feb 14, 2004 3:19 PM
|
Re: Law and Liberty, Law and Gospel
|
Anonymous
|
Sun Feb 15, 2004 9:05 AM
|
Re: ...The people miscalled Antinomians ?
|
Anonymous
|
Fri Feb 20, 2004 7:30 AM
|
Is there a name they call this particular view?
|
Tom
|
Sun Feb 29, 2004 2:09 AM
|
Re: Is there a name they call this particular view?
|
Anonymous
|
Sun Feb 29, 2004 2:15 AM
|
Re: Is there a name they call this particular view?
|
Anonymous
|
Sun Feb 29, 2004 10:29 PM
|
Re: Is there a name they call this particular view?
|
Tom
|
Mon Mar 01, 2004 6:24 PM
|
Re: Is there a name they call this particular view?
|
Anonymous
|
Tue Mar 02, 2004 8:31 AM
|
|
|
|
0 members (),
90
guests, and
33
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|