John 6.53

[peacemaker]

I don't believe them knowing is a prerequisite for being accountable. There is an old saying: Ignorance of the Law is no excuse.
If a cop pulls you over and you say "I didn't know about that" he will still give you a ticket.

We've all heard that: "Ignorance of the law is no excuse."

What is legal in the Copper State of Arizona, may be illegal in the Golden State of California, but is it a state of knowing?

If ignorance of the law is no excuse, then, I take it, one is obligated or required to know the law?

(Modified post for reasons of gender)

A few years back there was a federal district court judge who ruled that a defendant must be acquitted,
if he had acted in good "faith" believing he was not violating any law.

Can you define ignorance of the law, verses acting in faith?

[Seth]

I don't believe them knowing is a prerequisite for being accountable. There is an old saying: Ignorance of the Law is no excuse.
If a cop pulls you over and you say "I didn't know about that" he will still give you a ticket.

We've all heard that: "Ignorance of the law is no excuse."

What is legal in the Copper State of Arizona, may be illegal in the Golden State of California, but is it a state of knowing?

If ignorance of the law is no excuse, then, I take it, one is obligated or required to know the law?

No not necessarily. As I said, if someone breaks a traffic law, they will be ticketed whether they knew or not, depending on the officer. But the officer has the right to judge the offender whether the offender knows the law or not, and will be fulfilling their office by doing so.

So the judge that you mentioned was lenient. However, that judge would not have been out of line to have held the person accountable if the judge had made that choice.

Can you define ignorance of the law, verses acting in faith?

Great question. The answer is two-fold according to disobedience according to ignorance, and obedience according to a changed nature by the Spirit, even without having the law.

Disobedience: Ignorance of the law that I am referring to is when someone breaks the law, even when not knowing the law, and are then judged as I described above. In relation to the Spirit, the judgment would be in their favor: when God's judgments are in the earth, the people of the world learn righteousness.

Obedience: Ignorance of the law verses acting in faith in terms of our walk in Christ means that we will BY NATURE do the things that are in the law (ie fulfill the righteousness of the law which is love) without the letter. This is via Romans 2.

Those who act in faith do not act in CONTRARY to the law, but they do the things (like honoring their mothers and fathers) not due to the letter but by nature, which is the Godly nature imparted by the Spirit. That means that those who are ignorant but by nature are obedient are a law unto themselves showing that it is written in their hearts, not that they live by the letter.

In other words, in terms of obedience, the ones who act in faith to Christ are naturally obedient to the righteousness of the law.

[sheila]

   He said this due to the annointing/spirit that He was of

  He knew there were many[offspring of viper] other spirits

that people were eating of.

   this 'other' spirit would say 'cause the HOLY ONE of ISRAEL to

cease from before us" or would extinguish a smouldering wick


Jesus come to light the candle of every man .He would not

extinguish a smoldering wick. That smoldering wick was the

breath of God that was breathed into the family of Adam.That is

why Jesus could say to some'you have been with me from the

beginning.".for they were God's first and delivered unto Christ.

  to be relit/resurrected/quickened


  That is also why He said if the light in you is really

darkness,how great is that darkness.When the light in you is

really darkness it is the abomination of desolation,for that light

is the anti-Christ spirit..and puts the spirit of Christ to death in

the person/temple it dwells in/rejecting him. 

  He  says'tear down this temple and I will raise it in three

days"

   There is a 'sin unto death" and a sin not unto death,

  the mother of the living was a sin not unto death and portrays

the woman/flesh..and the sin unto death KNOWINGLY

committed by Adam portrays the son of perdition/evil spirit not

of God. Christ was certainly not of The Family of the

   UNSANDALED. John told him,that he was unworthy to untie

  His sandals. In other words, John was unable to deliver the

family of Adam from the offspring of vipers.Mt 3;7,But as

the freind of the bridegroom,he rejoiced. John was beheaded

due to telling Herod it was unlawful for him to have his brothers

wife...evidently the brother must be dead before brother-in-law

marriage is performed. And so too, under law, the sin unto

death had been commited,and Jesus Christ was and did raise up

seed for his dead brother Adam


  He further identified these other spirits when He said'You are

of your father the devil,and you do his will." Satan killed Adam

  [made in the image of God] to seize his wife and raise up his

own kind.  Now we can understand a little better Abraham

asking Sarah to say 'you are my sister" and Isaac,too, had the

  same fear in regard to Rebecca.


   The spirit and the bride say 'Come"

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: LOVE IT!  :thumbsup: Blessings....

[peacemaker]

I don't believe them knowing is a prerequisite for being accountable. There is an old saying: Ignorance of the Law is no excuse.
If a cop pulls you over and you say "I didn't know about that" he will still give you a ticket.

We've all heard that: "Ignorance of the law is no excuse."

What is legal in the Copper State of Arizona, may be illegal in the Golden State of California, but is it a state of knowing?

If ignorance of the law is no excuse, then, I take it, one is obligated or required to know the law?

No not necessarily. As I said, if someone breaks a traffic law, they will be ticketed whether they knew or not, depending on the officer. But the officer has the right to judge the offender whether the offender knows the law or not, and will be fulfilling their office by doing so.

So the judge that you mentioned was lenient. However, that judge would not have been out of line to have held the person accountable if the judge had made that choice.

Can you define ignorance of the law, verses acting in faith?

Great question. The answer is two-fold according to disobedience according to ignorance, and obedience according to a changed nature by the Spirit, even without having the law.

Disobedience: Ignorance of the law that I am referring to is when someone breaks the law, even when not knowing the law, and are then judged as I described above. In relation to the Spirit, the judgment would be in their favor: when God's judgments are in the earth, the people of the world learn righteousness.

Obedience: Ignorance of the law verses acting in faith in terms of our walk in Christ means that we will BY NATURE do the things that are in the law (ie fulfill the righteousness of the law which is love) without the letter. This is via Romans 2.

Those who act in faith do not act in CONTRARY to the law, but they do the things (like honoring their mothers and fathers) not due to the letter but by nature, which is the Godly nature imparted by the Spirit. That means that those who are ignorant but by nature are obedient are a law unto themselves showing that it is written in their hearts, not that they live by the letter.

In other words, in terms of obedience, the ones who act in faith to Christ are naturally obedient to the righteousness of the law.

Thank you for setting forth the boundaries within the explanation; Disobedience and Obedience. It was helpful in understanding. But this is not a "Willful blindness" which is equivalent to having knowledge, with regards to those who should have known the SPIRIT of the law.

The statement "ignorance of the law is no excuse" is an ancient legal doctrine:

        Ignorance of the law excuses no man; not that all men know the law, but because
           'tis an excuse every man will plead, and no man can tell how to confute him.

Therefore, ignorance of the law did not justify an act, and since every person is presumed to know the law; they could not provide a rebuttal.

The laws have/had swollen to a size that is unknowable, even by the so called experts themselves. And many are/were held to the letter, contrary to the Spirit.

Surely, "our walk in Christ means that we will BY NATURE do the things that are in the law (i.e. fulfill the righteousness of the law which is love) without the letter."  :thumbsup:

Jesus brought before Caiaphas

Those who had seized Jesus led Him away to Caiaphas, the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were gathered together (the law makers?).

But Peter was following Him at a distance as far as the courtyard of the high priest, and entered in, and sat down with the officers to see the outcome.

Now the chief priests and the whole Council kept trying to obtain false testimony against Jesus, so that they might put Him to death.

They did not find any, even though many false witnesses came forward. But later on two came forward, and said, "This man stated, ' I am able to destroy the temple of God and to rebuild it in three days.'"

The high priest stood up and said to Him, "Do You not answer? What is it that these men are testifying against You?"

But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest said to Him, "I adjure You by the living God, that You tell us whether You are the Christ, the Son of God."

Jesus said to him, "You have said it yourself; nevertheless, I tell you, hereafter you will see THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER, and COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN."

Then the high priest tore his robes and said, "He has blasphemed! What further need do we have of witnesses? Behold, you have now heard the blasphemy; what do you think?" They answered, "He deserves death!"

Then they spat in His face and beat Him with their fists; and others slapped Him, and said, "Prophesy to us, You Christ; who is the one who hit You?" (Matthew 26:57-68)

John 11:49 And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, 50 Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. 51 And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation;  52 And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad. 53 Then from that day forth they took counsel together for to put him to death.


"The caterpillar of mans volitional ignorance, gives way to the Spiritual butterfly of wisdom."

Much like Joseph's brothers who lacked knowledge and understanding:

"As for you, you intended evil against me, but God disposed it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive." (Genesis 50:20)

Indeed, If they knew, they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory.

But the Letter of the Law cannot be upheld, without the Spirit of the Law being Fulfilled.

[Seth]

The statement "ignorance of the law is no excuse" is an ancient legal doctrine:

        Ignorance of the law excuses no man; not that all men know the law, but because
           'tis an excuse every man will plead, and no man can tell how to confute him.

Therefore, ignorance of the law did not justify an act, and since every person is presumed to know the law; they could not provide a rebuttal.

Perhaps, but the same concept is still applicable to those who do not know the law at all even in our society. Not everyone is presumed to know the law in our society, and even when they they don't, those who enforce the law are not bound by the knowledge of them who break it. In other words, it is not out of line for a judge or police officer to hold a law breaker accountable even if they didn't know they broke a law. This does not preclude the option of leniency, but that leniency is not mandatory for the officer or judge.

Then they spat in His face and beat Him with their fists; and others slapped Him, and said, "Prophesy to us, You Christ; who is the one who hit You?" (Matthew 26:57-68)

John 11:49 And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, 50 Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. 51 And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation;  52 And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad. 53 Then from that day forth they took counsel together for to put him to death.


"The caterpillar of mans volitional ignorance, gives way to the Spiritual butterfly of wisdom."

Much like Joseph's brothers who lacked knowledge and understanding:

"As for you, you intended evil against me, but God disposed it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive." (Genesis 50:20)

Indeed, If they knew, they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory.

We do agree then, as Jesus said on the cross "they know not what they do." That was really my main point. When Caiaphas spoke, he did so not of himself. Now, they did hear the words that he spoke under influence of the Spirit, but did they understand? Of course not. That goes back to the levels of human behavior that I was talking about before. There is knowledge, then deeper, there is understanding.

Did they know that Jesus was the Messiah. We could argue that for days. What is clear, is that they did not understand. And that goes all the way back to my main point which was to answer the first post: Jesus spoke Spiritual words veiled in physical language in order to hide the truth. So that, whatever they superficially knew, they truly did not understand, and therefore they killed him, thus fulfilling what he wanted: to be killed.

But the Letter of the Law cannot be upheld, without the Spirit of the Law being Fulfilled.

There is no phrase that I know of in the Bible which is "the Spirit of the Law." It is referred to as "The Spirit of God." The letter is not God, which is why it is not called "the Spirit of the Law" in the Scripture. The difference between the letter of the Law and the Spirit, is that the letter is external and not living, and the Spirit of God is living and internal. That is why, what the Law could not do, Jesus was able to do.

Example: if you said "The letter of the Law cannot be upheld without the Spirit of God" I would have to seriously clarify. With the Spirit of God it becomes unnecessary to live by the letter of the Law, but to fulfill the righteousness of the Law. If we live by the letter, then we have to obey all of it, including all the sacrifices and Levitical priesthoods. But if we live by the Spirit of God, then the things that are in the letter will naturally be fulfilled WITHOUT living according to the letter: meaning someone without a copy of the 10 Commandments in the jungles of Africa with the Spirit could naturally fulfill righteousness, being naturally inclined to love God, to honor mother and father, without living by the letter but by Faith in Christ.

[peacemaker]

The one who defines the word sets the rules and determines the course.

"But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart,
by the Spirit, not by the letter itself; and his praise is not from men, but from God."

To fulfill the righteousness of the Law (the spirit of the law, if you will), walk in the
Spirit that preserves life to the highest degree of perfection; Love.

In the faith of Christ

[Seth]

The one who defines the word sets the rules and determines the course.

"But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart,
by the Spirit, not by the letter itself; and his praise is not from men, but from God."

To fulfill the righteousness of the Law (the spirit of the law, if you will), walk in the
Spirit that preserves life to the highest degree of perfection; Love.

In the faith of Christ

I agree. Also, thank you for clarifying what you mean by "spirit of the law." I know better what you mean now.