Godshew.org's Uncensored Discussion Forum

Godshew.org's Uncensored Discussion Forum
Start a New Topic 
Is Logic a Law ?

Hello Daniel.
I found your thought very interesting and similar to some of my current thought.
However I would go even further than you. I think that opposite things will coexist in future. I do not see oxymorons in Bible as bad thing but as good thing.
I think that main enemy is Law, but this Law starts at Logic.
I would not say that currently it is good to abandon Logic, but in future it will be ceased. All will be possible and existing even LAW.
Why I oppose logic ? I think that it is most visible in Genesis. There is only one commandment for Adam. Do not know Good and Evil. God LAW is to not know LAW - pure paradox.
Logic is Lie. Definition of Truth impose true status on itself. Why truth is true ? Because it is true. But logic forbids to make definition cyclic reference to itself for proving itself.
I think that Nature IS paradox. Both absolute truth and absolute falsehood can coexist and all will be good. Sentence "this sentence is true" (from LAW) reduces reality and sentence "this sentence is false" (from GRACE) expands it.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?

Grace unto you, and peace,
from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

As Doctor Who said: "not wrong, just more to learn"; For as Bible Translators said: "it is preposterous order to teach first and learn afterward"; And as Paul The Apostle of JC said: (plural and contrary) scriptues were "written aforetime for our learning": Romans 15. So JC said God said: "go ye and learn" what Hosea 6:6 meaneth: Matthew 9:13... Which is to say "I will have mercy, and not sacrifice" has an allegoric meaning, such as I will have grace, and not law. When studied out, the "not" part (sacrifice: by the law) is not then, not now, not ever. For what's "evident" from all the evidence is that no man (of child/man) is justified "by the law": Galatians 3, and sacrifice is "by the law": Hebrews 10. So by connecting these biblical dots we learn that God will have grace, not law (not then, not now, not ever). For grace is constructive, and law is destructive. Every way you look at law you lose, ending not only grounded, but also groundead. So the objective is to flush law as if dung before law flushes you, and all the kingdom of God within you.

As for logic, Spock: a charater from Star Trek on Space Channel says it this way: 'logic is not the end of wisdom, logic is only the beginning of wisdom'.

The term "beginning of wisdom" is found twice in the Bible, firstly in plural Psalms 111:10 of Patriarch David, secondly in plural Proverbs 9:10 of Patriarch Solomon. Both say "fear" is "the beginning of wisdom", and note it's "fear of the LORD (LAW)". Solomon the wise guy goes on to say "and knowledge of the holy is understanding". For Solomon previously said in Proverbs 4: "Wisdom [is] the principal thing; [therefore] get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding". David also previously said, in his MEM portion of ALEPH to TAU in Psalms 119: "Through thy precepts I get understanding".

Yet when considering the "allegory" of the "mystery" in the "shew", and studying it out further in the New Testament: a better testament with better hope and better things provided for us (of them/us) by plural God (of two Gods portrayed), we find under-standing is still both "under" and "standing"; Not above nor seated. Our objective is to get "above" and seated, since it is only "harmless" above, and seated denotes peace (rest); Whereas under has "jeopardy" and "standing" denotes unrest (division). So then under-standing is not the be all and end all, not even when standing right of left/right in Jesus, since it is still under, not above; Or still division, not peace, and still partiality, not perfection.

Also "under" can be either "under the law" or "under grace", until told "we are not under the law, but under grace": Romans 6. Jesus was notably made "under the law", and notably to redeem those under the law: Galatians 4. But redeemed is not yet reconciled, so even when redeemed there is still the matter of being reconciled, which is done "in Christ", not in Jesus. For "Jesus" is only the Saviour of Israel (of Jacob/Israel), but "the God of the living" is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Furthermore "Christ" is the "Saviour of the world", since "there is no respect of persons with God", only against God. If not with, then against. If not grace, then law. Furthermore, of three Saviours: Jesus, and Christ, and God, the only one who cannot lie nor die is God. So our objective is "be ye reconciled to God", and more specifically "that God" of this/that Gods portrayed: 2Corinthians 5.

As for the 'commandment' ye 'suppose' is given Adam (male and female them), and by God; Notice the 'question' of the serpent, unto the "Woman", is: "hath God said" Genesis 2:17? She answered yea, which is incorrect. For if "God" said every tree and not every tree, it would make God an oxymoron: the mixture of contrary things. So it is written that the "Woman" (not Adam), "being deceived", was "in the transgression": 1Timothy 2:14, which is to allegory say the Woman was in the law. For where no law, there no transgression: Romans 4:15, and transgression (sin) is of the law: 1John 3:4.

So then, for the Woman to be in the transgression there had to be a law given long before 10 in stone and 613 in ink. We find such a law, "given by Moses": John 1:17, in Genesis 2:17; Which is "the law" of (plural and contrary) "commandments" that Christ abolished in Ephesians 2:15 to be our peace. For all other law(s) is added, and because of the transgression... to make it more obvious law is the problem in the first place.

Genesis 2:16 = grace ... above (with grace)
Genesis 2:17 = law ... beneath (under grace)

When combined, they are contrary "commandments"; similar to contrary commandments, of contrary commanders, given to Noah in the Flood Allegory. The allegoric moral of Noah's Ark is God is not the LORD: Grace is not the LAW; For 2 is not 7, and mercy is not sacrifice. God will have mercy, and not sacrifice. God will have grace, and not law.

So JC said God said, in John 8:23:
I am from above ... grace (Gen 2:16)
Ye are beneath ... law (Gen 2:17)

Grace: good only ... above (higher)
Law: good and evil ... beneath (under)

The problem with law: good and evil is duality that ends badly: evil. Law produces "evil concupiscence", which makes people do things they would not do, or not do things they would do; And then law hounds with a guilt trip after for either not doing or doing. So, like Do-teronomy and Don't-eronomy contains the curse of the law, it's damned if you Do and damned if you Don't. Such is plausible by resurrection of damnation, of two resurrections of two Sons Jesus, which then only continues the damnation process, as if to continue a sides war from the graves. But above, in grace that is one, and not one of twain but one above twain, there are no sides to take in God is one, nor any wars to fight in Christ is our peace. So, it is a good (God) thing (singular) that the heart be established "with grace" (not under grace): Hebrews 13:9. For it did not profit "them" to be occupied in meats: grace + law = life + dead.

"with grace": above: harmless (no under-taker)
"under grace": beneath: jeopardy (under-taker)

seated with Christ: above (no law = no sin = no death)
standing with Jesus: beneath (jeopardy every hour)

So then, with all thy getting of wisdom, get under-standing; But also go on unto perfection above, since under-standing stands in jeopardy every hour, of not only being grounded, but groundead by law (sacrifice).

So even when you get it right of left/right on high, there is still the matter of going higher of high/higher; Since the kingdom of God is not right of left/right division isn't peace, but higher of high/higher is harmless, not jeopardy. Such is also to allegory say be no more children, nor servants, for children differ nothing from servants = know nots: John 15:15 ... Galatians 4. Children of the kingdom get cast out, and servants get forgiven, but also unforgiven and tormented.

The (childish) law and the prophets (servants) notably [were: past tense] until John (the Baptist: aka Elijah: vengeful prophet of law), but since that time the kingdom of God (grace and truth) is preached, and every man (of child/man) presseth into it: Luke 16:16.

So the kingdom of God is not for children (servants), but for man, more specifically the man who puts away childish things (laws), to become harmless. Such is Christ, not Jesus. So peace with God is "through Jesus --> Christ", AND reconciliation to God is "through Christ --> God-ward". So of three Saviours, the objective is to be reconciled to God, and more specifically to "that God" can't lie nor die. Which is also to say lay hold on eternal life that is not life ater death, but life void of death; And do so by hearing the higher calling of high/higher callings. For two Sons Jesus will only get you high; And false Christs rise to seduce; And the high calling of God (Law) is NOT wisdom from above, but earthy, sensual, devilish wisdom: James 3.

Jesus --> Christ --> that God.

So, the bottom line is flush law as dung before law flushes you and all the kingdom of God within you.

I hope that added some 'sense' to your logic. For we are told those of full age (grace full, mercy full, peace full) use all God given senses to discern law is both good and evil: ends badly: Hebrews 5. So
- if it looks Fishy, Eg: <:((>< swims bwd), and
- if it sounds like Horeb-bull (surely die), and
- if it smells Pewy (as churchy dung), and
- if it tastes Sweet + Bitter (good and evil), and
- if it feels like Hell when it's swallowed...
Then it's law: both good + evil: ends badly, as badly as blessed + cursed = accursed, and as badly as another law (love thy neighbor) ends feeling as "wretched" as PTSD, and also as badly as such grace + law is life + death ends not only grounded, but groundead. So we need to put away duality: "heaven and earth", by putting away earthy, sensual, devilish wisdom: law for first pure wisdom from "above": "Grace unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ"... the holy kiss of charity (put on "above" forgiving one another)

So that, when the shew is ended properly, as written, then it (law: sin and death) never happened, nor ever will happen, and due to grace and truth came, which is to say due to awareness law sucks every witch way you look at it, so law should be abolished, and to the point law vanishes. For we are told what is ready to vanish shall vanish. So there is not even any mention of law in the end to endure unto; And the end to endure unto is not grace Noah found in the eyes of the LAW, but JC grace which is with you all, against none. Furthermore the "you all" in the end to endure unto begins with "you", which is the end of the commandment: love one another, as I have loved "you"; And "the end of the commandment": you, is 3 things:
- charity out of a pure heart
(never fail when heart established with grace above)
- a good conscience (totally purged)
- faith unfeigned (no hypocrisy nor partiality)

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ with you all. Amen.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?

But in yours case, Grace REQUIRES Law. What is this law ?
Of course, that do not enter into the law.
This law has already been introduced in Eden. God forbid to know what law is (do not eat from tree of knowledge of good and evil). That was very simple and good law, but even this simple law was not obeyed.
Even such simple law is dangerous and will be probably not obeyed in eternity. So the only way is to remove ALL laws. Even this simple one. And that means that logic and all laws will be optional.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?


Grace (not law) unto you, and peace (not confusion),
from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

No. In my case Grace does not require Law. Just the opposite: Grace is sufficient, but only when law is not added to grace. For when law is added, it makes grace "no more grace".

Example: Galatians. The churches of Galtia began in the grace of Christ (is the end of the law). But they soon got "removed" from "the grace of Christ" by adding another law: love thy neighbor. In so doing (trying to be justified by law again), they fell from grace, and the result noted in Galatians 5:4 is this: Christ is of no effect to you, if justified by law. For then you are not led of the Spirit (Grace), but driven by the Ghost (Law).

So let us note the difference:
Law Driven: walk before me
Grace Led: follow me

It's like the difference pertaining to forgiveness:
Lord's Prayer: you first forgive for Law to forgive.
Paul's Epistles: God (Grace) first forgave you, and while yet sinners: Romans 5:8 ... Ephesians 4:32.

Notice the only plausible way "God hath forgiven you", and "while yet sinners", is by abolition of law; Since the law not only imputes sin, but also unpardonable sin, both in this world and the to come. As for the unpardonable sin: blaspheme the Ghost (speak against Law), everyone has in some small way done it, even if only to say a parental law was unfair, or an old law should be changed. So then, the only way God could forgive you of unpardonable sin is by abolition of law, all law written in stone and ink; By abolition of one lousy tree law in Genesis 2:17, since all other law was added because of it.

Furthermore, if these "contrary" things were of the same God, it would not only make this God an oxymoron, but have partiality to us of them/us:
- conclude them all in unbelief: sinners all
- have mercy on us all: sinners none

Worse yet, it would make God himself a sinner to conclude sinners all, none righteous, no, not one; Because God is one.

So then, we obviously have two Gods to sort out:
- the God of the dead: Law
- the God of the living: Grace
For we are told he is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living; Which is to allegory say he is not Law, but Grace. For such are "contrary" things, which can never co-exist in peace. Example:

Law: I will forsake you (Jeremiah 23:39)
Grace: I will never forsake you (Deuteronomy 4:31; Deuteronomy 31:6; Joshua 1:6; Hebrews 13:5)

I will have mercy, and not sacrifice,
is to allegory say I will have grace, not law.
Ps 40:6; 51:16; Hos 6:6; Mt 9:13; 12:7; Heb 10.

So the will of God, the mystery of his will made known unto us, is to have grace, not law; And the not part is not then, not now, not ever. Until we do that, we cannot receive the promise: Hebrews 10:36. All those who didn't do it notably died and received not the promise: Hebrews 11:13,39. So Hebrews 11 is not a hall of fame, but a hall of shame, and for playing the blame game.

Therefore, grace does not require law. For in saying my grace is sufficient for thee, it is as if saying no law is required. For that God is light, and him there is no darkness at all; Which is to allegory say that God is grace, and in him there is no law at all; And to allegory say that God is merciful, and in him there is no sacrifice at all; And to allegory say that God is peace (rest), and in him there is no division (unrest) at all. For God is not [the author] of confusion (unrest), but of peace (rest).

Jesus did not bring peace (rest), but rather brought swordy division (unrest). Christ is our peace (rest) who abolished the law. So then peace with God is notably "through Jesus --> Christ", only in Christ; And reconciling the world is done in Christ, not in Jesus. For Jesus was made under the law, but Christ is the end of the law. Jesus was not perfected, but Christ was made perfect, and thereby is author of eternal salvation, not both salvation and destruction. Jesus had goodness + severity, but Christ has only goodness. So firstly move on from Jesus to Christ, and then also be reconciled to God through Christ --> God-ward. For redeemed is not reconciled, and reconciled to death is a dead end which involves "forsaken", notable in seven last utterances of cloudy Jesus. Such then requires resurrection, but if there also be the resurrection of damnation (law), it only continues the damnation process from the grave, and with "greater damnation" to those in Mt 23 who compass land and sea to make one proselyte: twofold: more the child of hell (law).

Law is a grave subject.
Grace is not a grave subject.

Eternal life is not life after death, but rather life void of death. You don't get that by saying grace requires law, which is to say life requires death. Such would be to say awareness requires ignorance; Or to say oneness requires duality. It's absurd, as preposterous as teaching first and learning after.

God said let there be light (awareness, via grace and truth, eternal life thereof); Not both darkness and light. Light makes darkness flee, as awareness makes ignornance flee. Sheesh, even athiests are aware enough to notice if God were both light and darkness, he'd be an oxymoron, having bi-polar dis-order, like Dr Jeckyl and Mr Hyde: unapproachable since you never know if he might be having a vengeful law worketh wrath day. Yet they have not noticed God is light void of darkness means God is grace void of law. For they remain double-minded: good and evil; thinking themselves good of good vs evil; When told God is good only, and has no such duality nor any partiality.

Furthermore the day of the LORD (LAW) is darkness, and not light. So let's not go there; For there is no light in the grave.

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ with you all. Amen.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?

What you do and Paul did is in my opinion EXACTLY the LAW. Your law is obligation to believe in GRACE. What I think is that First Law God given in Genesis was LAW you said - to go GRACE not LAW (divide to good and evil). But this law as we know has been not keeped, so no God create universe where both LAW and GRACE are both good. This process is not finished yet but when it will be finished there will be no any risk to broke anything.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?

Grace unto you, and peace,
from God our Father and the Lord JC.

Grace does not force itself on anyone.
Law tries to force itself on everyone.

Grace truths until all are fully persuaded.
Law lies and demands blind faith obedience.

Grace waits to be asked, and "upbraideth not"
when asked nothing wavering by truth seekers.
Unjust Law can't wait to take vengeance on
it's victims also can't wait to be avenged.

Grace is not both good + evil, but good (God) only.
Law is both good + evil ends with evil concupiscence.

Grace can't be disobeyed by itself,
and can't be obeyed when law added.
Example: Genesis 2:16 + 17
2:16 - every tree, freely given ... grace(above).
2:17 - not every tree, surely die ... law(under).
Only what's freely given is of God: 1Cor 2:12.
If both of God it would make God an oxy-moron.
Gen 2:16 + 17 grace + law was as life + death,
which were as "contrary" as blessed + cursed.
What's under grace has under-taker jeopardy.
Mingled blessed + cursed = accursed: Gal 1:8.
So Christ would not receive the mingled drink.

So wise serpent asked did God say Genesis 2:17,
and deceived woman said God said Gen 2:16 + 17,
and the harmful serpent said law was not deadly.

So we are to be
wise as serpent and harmless as grace;
Not wise as serpent and harmful as law.

The grace of our Lord JC [is] with you all. Amen.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?

Hello David !

But WHO gave law in Gen 2:17 ? Take care WHAT is LAW in 2:17. It is not stupid law. This law states: do not eat fruit from tree of KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL : which I think means do not follow any other law (except this). So this law is what you say: follow GRACE. Banning the LAW is also a LAW. Please think of it. This is paradox but you can not escape it.
My starting pint is that Eden had to be different place that we think. Could the leg be broken there ? Braking the leg is also reulting from law (physical one). So maybe in Eden there really was no any law, except not discovering law ?
Remember that Adam was created on similiarity and image of God. So he could be powerful being. If he wanted to dicover laws maybe he was able to create them.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?

Marek, Marek,
(dble mindead pun)

Grace unto you, and peace,
from God our Father and the Lord JC.

What you're proposing is as ridiculous as refusing to flush the "dung" which the body has processed into the "be thou removed from me" sector of the body.

Indeed, good question: Who gave the law in Genesis 2:17 called "the law of commandments", even "the enmity" in Ephesians 2:15? Answer: "the law was given by Moses": John 1:17. Only this tree law was given "by" Moses. All other law (10 in stone, 613 in ink) were given unto Moses, "added" and notably "because of the transgression": Galatians 3:19. For "where no law, there no transgression": Romans 4:15. But "the woman, being deceived, was in the transgression": 1Timothy 2:14.

When connecting all these biblical dots, it reasons the only way the woman could be in the transgression was for there to be a law to transgress; "for sin is transgression of the law": 1John 3:4. No law = no transgression: Romans 4:15. No law = no sin: Romans 5:13. So to take away sin, and the death sting of sin, which law was both the source and strength of: 1Corinthians 15:56, you have to take away law. Christ did this, because "God did not send his Son to condemn (law) the world": John 3:17. So "we are delivered from the law": Romans 7:6, and by "Christ is the end of the law": Romans 10:4. Christ is our peace, who abolished (flushed) the law (of plural and contrary commandments) from his flesh: Ephesians 2:15. We are his flesh: Ephesians 5.

Look at Genesis 1, and notice what God saw was only "good" x7, and "very good" the 7th time; Not both good and evil, because law is good and evil, which ends badly: evil concupiscence. So what God saw was grace, which is "good" only, never good and evil; But the seventh time it was "very good".

Look at Genesis 1:26. Notice two options for "let us make man". Before: "our image". After: "after our likeness". Both are played out, for compare-i-son and contrast. Look in the mirror. Image is not likeness. Whatever likeness does, image reverses it. It's an endless mirror war, until likeness does this: "from such turn away". What then? Image vanishes. What then? Then it's Poof (not Puff) goes the dragon. So it is written about law: it's old, faulty, and ready to vanish: Hebrews 8:13, and it shall vanish: 1Corinthians 13:8. Why? Because it fails as often as people divorce. But grace never fails nor ever forsakes. When? When no law is added. For adding law to God's grace is like adding fail-u-are to never fail, and like adding death to eternal life.

Look at Genesis 1 and 2 to notice six days had "evening and morning", but on the seventh day there is no mention of even-ing and mourn-ing. On the seventh day God ended blessed and sanctified, then rested, as if resting his case.

It's "allegory" in both "covenants": Galatians 4, and "mystery" to solve, by "seek and ye shall find", "seek ye first the kingdom of God AND his righteousness", to "find grace". Why? To "obtain mercy", and "help", "in time": Hebrews 4:16.

It's "written aforetime for our learning": Romans 15:4; To go ye and learn what "I will have mercy, and not sacrifice" meaneth, in places like Psalms 40:6; Psalms 51:16; Hosea 6:6; Matthew 9:13; Matthew 12:7; Hebrews 10: all. In Hebrews 10 we are told sacrifice is "by the law"; And in Galatians 3:10 we are told that no man is justified "by the law"; And in Matthew 12:330-37 it's either justified (by grace) or condemned (by law) by your words; And in Matthew 15:11 (Mark 7:18-23)it's defiled by your own words, and from your own heart; And in Hebrews 13:9 the heart should be established with grace; For in James 3:6 what the tongue saith from a lawed heart can defile the whole body. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump; like a little cancer us law can and will kill the whole body if it's not removed in time.

So "I will have mercy, and not sacrifice" obviously means God will have grace (life), and not law (death). Furthermore the "not" part is not then, not now, not ever. For by the u-sing of laws all perish: Colossians 2:20-22; Perish the thought: 2Corinthians 10:5.

What you're proposing is as ridiculous as refusing to flush the "dung" that the body has processed into the "be thou removed from me" sector of the body.

As the natural body processes things eaten into save and delete sectors; So also the spiritual body of Christ processes things swallowed into save and delete sectors.

The law was given by Moses, but
grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

He taketh away the first (law), that
he might establish the second (grace).

So: Press DELETE to take away law.
Then: Press SAVE to establish grace.

For you can't put on immortality,
till you first put off mortality.
They are "contrary" things, and if
mingled become life + death (added).

You can't put on incorruption (grace),
till you first put off corruption (law).

You can't put on incorruptible grace,
till you first put off corruptible law.

Born again is "not of corruptible seed",
but notably of "incorruptible" grace; And
you can't be born again till you die to the law.
Only dying to the law is becoming alive unto God.
The only other option is to die by the law, which
is as not suffered to continue by reason of death.

Endure unto the end, in order to be saved (only),
instead of both saved + destroyed by grace + law,
obviously requires "continue" to "go on"; And in
Hebrews 6 "go on" first requires "leaving" law.
Hebrews 7 notes priests who did not leave the law
were "not suffered to continue by reason of death".

In other words, flush your "dung" (law) child,
and because it's "the ministration of death".

The GRACE of our Lord JC [is] with you all. Amen.


Re: Is Logic a Law ?

You introduce LAW (salvation by GRACE) and say it is not law. This is my only problem.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?

not grace but obligation to believe in grace

Re: Is Logic a Law ?

Not obligation nor believe, but know.
It's not believe that makes you free.
It's "know" the truth makes you free.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?

How can you know it ? Believe me, it is difficult to really know something in this world. It can be always multilevel "Matrix".

There are your words:

"You can't put on incorruption (grace),
till you first put off corruption (law)"

IS IT NOT A LAW ? THIS is adding mixed things toghether.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?


Grace unto you, and peace,
from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Indeed, let us dare compare and contrast:
- that world: "that God": "Grace" ... "Above"
- "this world": this God: "Law" ... "Beneath"

Example: John 8:23
- I am not of this world. I am from above.
- Ye (err) are of this world. Ye are beneath.

In "this world" (Law) things can get as complex and confusing as a multi level matrix. Sometimes the harder you try, the worse it gets. Law vs Law can become as Loser vs Loser: hopeless. In this law law world even love fails as oft as people divorce. Lives get ruined by wrongful conviction. Soldiers who make it home from war get PTSD. People who should be trusted (parents, teachers, priests) can turn out to be abusers. It's not even survival of the fittest, for even the fittest can drop dead. Getting sick can become fatal if you get a wrong medication or if you've signed your organ donor card. The list of "jeopardy every hour" is endless, and it can include going to church; For in the churches there are dogs, sorcerers, whoremongers, murderers, idolaters, makers of lies, and lovers of lies: Revelation 22. So nothing in this world of law can be trusted. Even your own family can become your enemy. Believers believe all sorts of whacky religious stuff, like you too can have partiality (a personal Saviour) from an impartial God. It's a world of both good and evil, witch ends badly.

In that world (Grace) that God is light (grace) and in him there is no darkness (law) at all. He will never leave nor forsake you like Law does. That Christ of that God is the end of the law, not the mend of law. So in that world there is no under-taker jeopardy every hour, no enemies to try and love, only friends. It's not a world of good and evil, but good only, which even gets better as people grow in grace. It's not hopeless, but hopeful. For that God is not the author of confusion (law), but of peace (grace). His peace is not won by winning any left/right sides war, but the absense of sides and side effects of war.

When we dare to compare and contrast the glory of law (this world) vs the glory of grace (that world), we find grace is merciful, not merciless, and so exceedingly "much more" glory us that law glory to them fades to nothing by comparison and contrast: 2Corinthians 3; Kinda like the moon and stars fade to nothing (vanish) at the coming of the sun. The Grace (God) of our Lord Jesus Christ is called 'Amazing Grace'. It's not cloudy and depressing, but sunny and enLIGHTening.

So it's not only this world vs that world, but this God vs that God. For the God of this world (Law) is the God of the dead; But the God of that world (Grace) is the God of the living. By dying to the Law (instead of dying by the Law), we become alive unto that God (Grace).

It's like leaving corruption (law) to go on unto incorruption (grace), and like leaving mortality (law) to go unto immortality (grace), and like leaving imperfection (law) to go on unto perfection (grace); in the same manner we leave child to become man, and leave harmful to become harmless.

Hebrews 6 says leaving the principles (laws) let us go on unto perfection (grace). One of the principles to leave is resurrection of dead; For there are no dead to resurrect in perfection. Reusrrection is a grave subject. Grace is not a grave subject. Eternal life is not life after death, but life void of death; Which is only plausible by grace void of law, which is mercy void of sacrifice, which is peace (rest) void of confusion (unrest).

Going on, from Hebrews 6, we find harmless is higher than high, higher than the heavens on high, higher than either side of the majesty on high; As above is not beneath, as that world is not this world, as grace is not law law. So it's not a matter of being right of left/right things on high, but a matter of being above of under/above, and because when above there is no under-taker jeopardy every hour. So Hebrews 13:9 notes it's good (God) thing that the heart be established "with grace", not just under grace, which hasn't profited them occupied in laws.

"With Grace": "Above"... that world of that God.
"Under Grace": "Beneath"...this world of this God.

We all start out "under grace": Romans 6:14,15.
The objective is to be established "with grace".

With Grace: no under-taker jeopardy... harmless.
Under Grace: has under-taker jeopardy... harmful.

The grace of our Lord JC [is] with you all. Amen.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?

Do not you think that it is one God, but salvation is process.I do not understand how there could be two gods if there will be one END

God introduced simple law in Eden: do not create or follow any law (to make you know good and evil results).

But this Law (which is actually the same you and Paul propose) was already NOT KEPT BY ADAM.

The question is what is mix of law and grace: saying that "ALL are saved" or ADDING LAW TO GRACE saying "law keepers can not be saved"

Re: Is Logic a Law ?


Grace (not law) unto you, and peace (not confusion),
from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

NO. You're still mingling "contrary" things, which cannot co-exist in peace, and only mingle to make an oxy-moron; Which God is not, and you should not be either. God is not the author of confusion, but of peace. So let's review some things to help bring clarity.

Point #1: There is no partiality with God. So it's either all saved or none saved; All inclusive or all exclusive. Furthermore all inclusive is only plausible by grace void of law, since grace + law is saved + destroyed; Due to being blessed + cursed = accursed. Since grace always is, and law was added, the only plausible mixture is grace + law (added), which becomes life + death (added). Hence the only way for any, and all, to be saved only, is by grace void of law. Hence Christ is the end of the law, and Christ would not receive the "mingled drink", which is allegory for Christ would not receive grace + law, because grace + law would be blessed + cursed, which is saved + destroyed, which is life + death. Such would require resurrection to be alive, but resurrection of the dead includes resurrection of damnation (law), which would continue damning all. Furthermore it would make him God of the dead, and he is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living.

Point #2: By the curse of the law in Deuteronomy (which all the people said amen to twelve times) if any try and fail to keep all the law all the time, unto a thousand generations, it's all cursed; Not just the person who tried and failed. Furthermore if you fail to keep any jot or tiddle of law it's as if failing to keep all the law, and the penalty is death. Obviously some tried and failed to keep all the law, so law becomes a mission impossible; Especially since inexcusable law not only imputes sin, but unpardonable sin, which hath never forgiveness, neither in this world nor the to come. So it is written as in Adam all die: 1Cor 15; Which is allegory for as in Law all die. For the using of laws all perish. So touch not, taste not, handle not any law: Col 2:20-22.

Point #3: The Adamic God is plural: them all and us all; Also partial to us: provided some better thing for us than for them. This plural God concluded all in unbelief to have mercy on all; But such is two alls, one too many alls. Furthermore it would be all dead first, and all alive after. Such would make this God the God of the dead. But we are told the only true God is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living. So we leave this plural God to go on unto the God of the living.

It's "allegory" in both "covenants", and "mystery" to solve in time; So allegoric mystery with lots of twists to it; requiring thinking on your part to solve it, by connecting all the biblical dots. For escape is by giving more earnest heed to what's said, and escape is either for all or none at all, since there is no partiality with God. So dividing goats and sheep, destroying goats and saving sheep, is as having partiality to sheeple, which is not Godly.

Furthermore if no man is justified by the law: Gal 3, and sacrifice is by the law: Heb 10, then it reasons no man is justified by sacrifice; Especially if told God will have mercy, and not sacrifice, and the not part of such is not then, not now, not ever. Why? Because I will have mercy and not sacrifice, means I will have grace and not law, which means I will salvation and not destruction, which means I will have life and not death. Thereby God cannot die, and because God (Grace) cannot lie (law).

The GRACE of our Lord Jesus Christ [is] with you all. Amen.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?

If there was no law at the begining then someone could create law becouse it was not forbidden.
If everything was allowed then it was also allowed to create some law. It is unescapable.
If there was law to not create any law it was already law and this is what was described in Genesis. Who ever created this first law it was attempt to preserve freedom as much as possible.
For me Grace will create world where everything is possible, whenever you use some law or not.
It is interesting for me that Jesus said "“Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. “For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled"

Re: Is Logic a Law ?


Grace unto you, and peace (not confusion),
from God, our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Higher Grace does not 'forbid' (law); Nor is it 'against' anyone or 'against' anything. Higher 'harmless' Grace simply awares about the dichotomy of peril them (Jude 1:5) and peril us (2Timothy 3:1) if still 'double minded': them/us minded, which James 1:8 notes is 'unstable' both 'ways' when still having plural ways, by having a plural and contrary God on high; Who does provide some 'better' thing for us, than for them. Eg: 'love your enemies' is 'better' than 'hate thine enemy', which both come from the same time past/last days God on 'high'.

Butt even 'love your enemies' still has 'enemies', and thereby still 'stands in jeopardy every hour'; So what's best of good, better, best, is to have no enemies to hate or to love. Such requires putting away plural God on high for the higher God is one, has only friends, no enemies at all.

Eg: 'That God is light, and in him there is no darkness at all' is like allegory saying that Grace is pure grace having no law at all, or like saying that Religion is pure religion having no vanity nor vexation at all, or like saying that Peace has no confusion at all. All friends has no enemies. All grace has no enmity. Oneness is not plural. Plural God is both peril them and peril us: 2Timothy 3:1, whether we are in time past or in last days. Oneness is not last 'days', but last 'day'.

As for Matthew 5:17b, the allegory of such is:
I am (grace) not come to destroy (law),
but to fulfill (to grace and truth).

For only when we know the truth,
came along with grace (John 1:17),
are we made free of believe lies (laws).

And the allegory of Matthew 5:18 is:
Till heaven and earth (doubleminded grace and law) pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law (is both good and evil, life and death). As long as we have both heaven and earth, even a new heaven and earth, we'll have above and under, grace and law, which is life and death, which ends earthy, not heavenly. Hence Colossians 3 says if risen with Christ, who sitteth above, then think only of heavenly things above, not things on the earth.

So until we put away the duality, doublemindedness, plurality of heaven and earth, above and under, it will be like having grace and law, is like having life and death, ends badly: death; Even if be choosing the better of two 'death's in Revelation, by having the better two 'resurrections' from 'graves' in John 5:29, by still having two 'finished's in "Verily, verily" John: John 17:4 and John 19:30. For law imputed sin, when "it is finished", brings death (not eternal life): James 1:15.

Death requires resurrection, which is like reset, play again till you "win" the human "race". For better is not yet best, nor yet true rest.

John 17:4, 1st "finished" the race = "win".
"It is finished", 2nd "finished" = "place". So
Eph 4:27 says neither give "place" to the devil
(allegory: neither give place to the sacrifice),
it later gathers ppl to this "place": Armageddon.

I hope that made some sense to you, of ye/you. For even when you, of ye/you, you can still fall from grace, as noted in Galatians 5:4; Until you get above and beyond both double minded dichotomies of left/right and under/above.

True oneness has neither a left/right dichotomy nor an under/above dichotomy. In that oneness, of that God, higher than the heavens, there is only light, no darkness at all, only grace, no law at all, only mercy, no sacrifice at all, only peace, no confusion at all, only life, no death at all; only eternity, no beginning and end. Such is true rest of the seventh day, has no even-ing and mourn-ing.

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ with you all. Amen.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?

Are you aware that truth definition in logic maybe is also double minded/dichotomy ? In fact "truth" in logic can only be defined by itslef, but logic forbids to define something by itself.
I'm not sure thta duality will be bad by itself. Remember that saying "bad" means law.
In act in Eden only some special kind of duality was forbiden to try and it was good/evil duality. Now this duality is everything e.g. hot/cold has good/evil aspect in it - you can die from it. But it could be different. That in my opinion is the key to definition of law. Every law divides to good/evil depending on your "input". So you have to have entropy and death. It is every law do it.
So first law was not to create/try any law (you could have opositions but not to divide on good/evil axis).
I do not know Bible to much but it is interesting to observe trees in it. E.g. Jesus condomes fig tree which can be in my opinion could be figure of Law from Genesis. Tree days later he is judged.
Interesting is also Jonah, which is very sucessful prophet in Niniva but he disagree with God about tree which God condomes.
As you said law was not abonded but needs to be fulfilled. What will be the result ? Can we imagine it ?
Maybe it will be continuum, where eveything is NOW.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?


Grace (not law) unto you, and peace (not confusion),
from God, our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

NO. Your 'continuum' of Q is imagined, by TV;
due to still being image, of image/likeness.
Image is before, of before/after in Gen 1:26.

Grace does not 'forbid' (law),
Nor even 'imagine' any vain (f-lawed) things;
Unless it's f-lawed grace (both good + evil), like
Noah found in (plural) eyes of the LORD (Adam1).

Adam1/Adam2: 1Cor 15:45 = soul/spirit: Heb 4:12:
Adam1 = a living "soul", not quickening "spirit".
The word of God divides asunder soul <--> spirit,
to get us from soul-ish part, to spirit-ual part.
But spirit-ual still has this to deal with:
"comparing spiritual things with spiritual",
is allegorically comparing laws with grace,
since law can be both natural and spiritual,
but also natural disaster when it's natural,
and spiritual wickedness when it's spiritual.
End Aside.

Noah's soul-ish dichotomy: both clean + unclean,
God + LORD, Grace + Law, is vain as Life + Death.
It saves eight souls and destroys them afterward.
So Noah got inducted to a hall of shame, not fame.
Moral of Deluge allegory is: God is not the LORD;
which is to say good only isn't both good + evil.

So then, leave the soul-ish dichotomy of Adam1,
to go on to the spirit-ual dichotomy of Adam2;
But then also realize it's still of plural God,
Who both "spake" unto them vs "spoke" unto us,
in both "time past" (BC) vs "last days" (AD),
by "prophets" vs by "Son" = better: Hebrews 1.

Eg: love neighbour + hate enenmy vs love enemies.
Love enemies is "better", but still has "enemies".
So plural God both peril them + peril us: 2Tim3:1.
In plural mode "we stand in jeopardy every hour",
even if we not "under" law, but "under" grace,
for both such under(s) have an "under"-taker,
due to still giving "place" to "enmity" (law).

Remember, it's a "mystery" to solve, in time,
(by seek and find grace "in time" to "help")
and "allegory", so then 'allegoric mystery'.

Every good mystery has twists, till very end.
Only the end is all truth, and no lie at all,
and by be-ing all grace, and no law at all,
is as if all light, and no darkness at all.
No even-ing and mourn-ing on "seventh day".

So, Better of twain isn't yet Best nor yet Rest,
until we also put away dichotomy of plural God.
Plural God on "high" is not "higher" God is one.
For potential harmageddon is not yet "harmless".
So a more excellent way isn't broad nor narrow.

If we don't put away plural God & Son on high,
choice becomes Death1 or Death2 in Revelation.
What then? Resurrection1 or Resurrection2. But
even the better of two resurrections is like
reset, play again, till you "win" human race.
1st finished = "win". 2nd finished = "place";
And give "place" to the devil (law) = "death".
Death is what God of the living will not have.

God of the living is not God of the dead.
If there be any dead, it's "greatly err".
Eg: Mt 22:29-32; Mk 12:24-27; Lk 20:34-38.
Err = reset, play again, until none perish.
"Us-ward" is not just right of left/right,
but above of under/above, so none perish.

Grace is not Law. Mercy is not Sacrifice.
Peace is not Confusion. One is not plural.

"Eternal Life" is not both Life and Death.
Rather eternal life is life void of death.

So then, to "lay hold on eternal life",
we leave the dichotomy of life and death,
which is to say leave such grace and law.
That is why the end has no mention of law.

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ with you all. Amen.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?

Daniel Miles

Grace (not law) unto you, and peace (not confusion),
from God, our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

NO. Your 'continuum' of Q is imagined, by TV;
due to still being image, of image/likeness.
Image is before, of before/after in Gen 1:26.

Grace does not 'forbid' (law),
Nor even 'imagine' any vain (f-lawed) things;
Unless it's f-lawed grace (both good + evil), like
Noah found in (plural) eyes of the LORD (Adam1).

If it not forbids someone will craete law. That in my opinion is main problem of redemption. There many aproches to freedom in world of powerful beings, but for me law in Genesis is quite resonable
to start. This in fact is law which encaplsulates entropy only in this law. If obeyed there is no death (entropy)
I'm software devloper and program in fact is some kind of artificial law. And I can susppect that any law will create entropy. Death is not punishment - it consequence of law - lack of freedom - you can choose or forced not to obey law and there are consequences there, so Elohim law was smallest possible -to forbid one choosing dimmension from Universe, becouse not every rule is law, only if it produces evil.
Too much hot is not bad alone it is bad becouse there are BAD CONSEQUENCES of physics law there.
Daniel Miles

Remember, it's a "mystery" to solve, in time,
(by seek and find grace "in time" to "help")
and "allegory", so then 'allegoric mystery'.

Every good mystery has twists, till very end.
Only the end is all truth, and no lie at all,
and by be-ing all grace, and no law at all,
is as if all light, and no darkness at all.
No even-ing and mourn-ing on "seventh day".

I agree that solution need to be done in time , continuum can be later then. Recently I study "son of man" which does seems in many ways not to be Jesus. Is it man son which means among other things that he lives in time.
What is solution of this mistery ? I have no idea. In thereo if someone already knew it (.eg. JEsus or Paul) the knowledge should work. But maybe the problem is that there is need to fulfill the law. Everyone must know that consequence of THEIR law is DEATH to THEMSELF. Law one be whatever even someone can create law that there is no law (but is is contradicting to itself).
Maybe every law contradics of it self. This is what I started in my first post.
I suspect that logic as thinking process is law and what more it can contradict itself, becouse it requires to be true without the proof what TRUTH IS, that mena that TRUTH IS TRUTH. This seems to be obvious, but logic forbids to prove anything by itself.
Daniel Miles

If we don't put away plural God & Son on high,
choice becomes Death1 or Death2 in Revelation.
What then? Resurrection1 or Resurrection2. But
even the better of two resurrections is like
reset, play again, till you "win" human race.
1st finished = "win". 2nd finished = "place";
And give "place" to the devil (law) = "death".
Death is what God of the living will not have.

Daniel Miles

So then, to "lay hold on eternal life",
we leave the dichotomy of life and death,
which is to say leave such grace and law.
That is why the end has no mention of law.

I would agree, but the problem is how to formulate Grace to be not law.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?


Grace, and Mercy, and Peace unto you,
from God, our Father, and our Lord JC.

Sorry for delayed response; didn’t notice your last post on GodShew forum.

Indeed, if Grace were ever forced upon people, it would then be as faulty as Law. So “the God of all grace”, aka the “higher” of two Gods (in heaven “higher than the heavens” on high), just waits for people to “ask”, before “liberally” giving people higher learning, and notably “without upbraiding” (no biting and smiting involved). Eg: in my case, like Saul of Saul/Paul, I did all the churchy things even more than pastors and priests, studied more than all my peers, and was more zealous than peers; But in the end of this 2D realm of my life I was weary, from the linear and circular logic, even when right of wrong/right, aka grace of law/grace, which is still division and not peace, still partiality and not perfection. So I finally trashed it all: all Bibles, books, audio tapes, videos, concordances, and notes… in the dumpster. For after seven years of diligent study on 15 lousy pages of Revelation, I couldn’t get anyone’s theory, not even my own, to compute from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21. So I gave up what I call study1 of study1/study2; study1 being as Eccleseastes 12:12’s study, and study2 being as 2Timothy 2:15’s study.

Then, while on the couch brooding, due to depression becoming bi-polar dis-order, I remembered and pondered a couple of Bible things, and as if now from within me.

The first thing was that God had said he would never leave nor forsake me, thrice in Deuteronomy 31:6, Deuteronomy 31:8, and Hebrews 13:5. So then, that had to be a different God than the other God who notably said in Jeremiah 23:39 Therefore, behold, I, even I, will utterly forget you, and I will forsake you.

The second thing was about when you lack wisdom, then you should “ask God”, But it clarified such was the God who “upbraided not” (didn’t bite nor smite any), And also clarified how to ask: “nothing wavering”; As noted in James 1:5-8 (KJV). So I asked that God, accordingly, noting I wanted the truth, not more confusion; For Paul said God is not [the author] of confusion (unrest), but of peace (rest).

Then I began getting the “higher” learning, as if being taught directly by the Spirit. It was as 3D mode from above of under/above, not 2D mode from right of left/right. So it was more like ‘dialectic’ logic, which is neither linear logic nor circular logic. Dialectic logic does look at both sides of any issue like law vs grace; But then concludes be neither of such “under the law” vs “under grace”, since both sides are “under”, so both have this problem: an under-taker.
Eg: heart established “with grace” =
neither “under the law” nor “under grace”.
Eg: being no more children =
neither children of the wicked nor children of God.
Eg: above a servant =
neither servants of sin nor servants of righteousness.
Eg: a more excellent way =
neither the broad way nor the narrow way in Mt 7.
Eg: greatest of three things =
neither great tribulation nor greater damnation.

So the higher God had not forced anything on me, but waited for me to ask; And after asking according to James 1:5-8, I got abundance of revelations.

I still have a briefcase of revelations I have not uploaded onto the web site. One reason is that it’s not up to me to do everyone else’s home-work; Else how would they learn and retain the learning if I did it all for them. Another reason is like Paul the Steward, I still both reveal and conceal. This way the mystery gets revealed to those who go on to 3D, but remains a mystery to those still in the 2D mode.

So like higher God, I wait for people to ask, then I share (not teach). Yet when I conceal, it’s as if in plain sight, for truth seekers to find. Eg: the GodShew Epistle, only goes out to subscribers who find it.I notice you haven’t yet found it and not yet subscribed to receive it.

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen.


Re: Is Logic a Law ?


Grace unto you, and peace,
from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ,

You seem to have conflated the meaning of a "prescriptive" law or a law that "prescribes" (e.g., "Thou shalt not kill") with the meaning of a "descriptive" law or a law that "describes" (e.g., F = MA); for the former comprises those things which are violable or able to be violated (e.g., edicts, rules etc.) while the latter comprises those things which are inviolable or not able to be violable.

Now any "law" whatsoever that "prescribes" anything whatsoever (e.g., one of the Ten Commandments) is a law that is violable. However, the expression "You can't put on incorruption (grace),
till you first put off corruption (law)" does NOT "prescribe" anything whatsoever; for it is merely a saying which expresses a proposition that DESCRIBES a certain reality - namely, that is NOT possible for one to put on incorruption without firstly putting off corruption.

Thus, clearly, such an expression is actually a DESCRIPTION, even a proper subclass of those sorts of things which are subsumed under that class of things which are NOT violable.

The grace of our Lord Jesus (the) Christ (be) with you all. Amen.

Re: Is Logic a Law ?

Hello ewashington

I understand that there is difference between this laws. But both are laws :). That what I want to say. In fact F=MA is physical law, but it is also a law which bind us to something.

The question is if at the end it will be no law at all (I can not imagine it too :)) or maybe law you propose which prevents from falling into another law.