| Re: Art|
Brother do I detect a little saurcasm in your response to Oracio? Your profile indicates you are one of the older members of this forum. I would think you would be an example of a gracious response of someone you took issue with.
| 2011/8/5 23:10|
| Re: Upgraded?|
In rereading a few of the posts I think I have to come down on the side of tuc on this one. I don't think it is Law 1.0 replaced by the superior Law 2.0 which includes the grace empowerment package. It is not a new version of the law in Christ, it is a new Covenant entirely.
I noticed that the end of 2 Cor. 3 was mentioned in a later post in relation to the upgrade issue.
2Co 3:6-18 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. (7) But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: (8) How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? (9) For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. (10) For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. (11) For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious. (12) Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: (13) And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: (14) But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. (15) But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. (16) Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away. (17) Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. (18) But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.
Notice that the law, and specifically the ten commandment portion, is called a ministration of death. It was glorious in the respect that it was God's law. What proceeds from God that is not glorious right? However Paul says something here that is similar to what he said in Rom. 7. The glorious thing that could only minister condemnation had no glory at all when compared to the ministration of righteousness. The new covenant so outshines the old that the old appears to have no glory at all. But the jews who still follow the law are blinded to the covenant that excels in glory. They are still looking at the old covenant as if it were the way. It is a blindness that is only removed when one of them turns his heart to the Lord and accepts salvation through Christ.
I don't think I would call Christ the law. He is the one in whom the whole law and the prophets found fulfillment. The law condemned us, Christ set us free from condemnation. He is the fulfillment of the law. Prophets foretold of a day when God would write His law on our hearts. Christ opened the way for regeneration of spirit in which we commune one on one with God and God can indeed write His laws on our heart. Not to mention the specific event prophecies. Christ is the fulfillment of the prophets.
| 2011/8/6 14:32||Profile|
| Re: |
If Christ is born again in us, He cannot sin, that is the only sinless perfection we have. How are we presented perfect to God, "Christ in you the hope of Glory", Col 1:27-28. The Holy Spirit is also perfect and as we walk in Him in our soul and mind we are perfect also and still our minds are being renewed to the perfect Mind of Christ.
Perfect in Spirit, which is Christ, perfect in soul when walking in the Spirit, will be perfect in the flesh in the resurrection. Still capable of sinning in the flesh, with the Advocate whom we must run to in confessing.
In Christ: Phillip
| 2011/8/6 17:30||Profile|
| Re: |
Personally I am thinking of our living in the New Covenant.t as a total reboot with new software. Ok, just being a little funny here.
| 2011/8/6 18:30|
| Re: Total Reboot|
I think you have not gone far enough with the analogy. I would call it transitioning to an entirely new operating system :-)
One thing I am totally sure of and that I think everyone on this thread can agree completely is that I am so thankful that Christ has opened up the way to right relationship to the Father through His sacrifice and that the righteousness that was impossible to attain prior to Christ's sacrifice is now mine through Him. One cannot just sit and meditate on the truth of God's grace for very long without wellsprings of thanksgiving bubbling up in his heart and praise to God pouring forth from his mouth. I am a friend of God. Isn't that amazing. Praise God!!
| 2011/8/6 19:26||Profile|
| Re: |
by martyr on 2011/8/5 20:10:17
"Brother do I detect a little saurcasm in your response to Oracio? Your profile indicates you are one of the older members of this forum. I would think you would be an example of a gracious response of someone you took issue with.
No sarcasm was intended. I merely wished to stress the full extent of what keeping even the Moral Laws of The Mosaic Covenant entails. Where does the NT 'Mercy Triumphs over Judgement, by what measure you measure to others so shall it be measured unto you.' when you are compelled by the Mosaic Law to carry out a severe punishment for violating a moral law.
Remember how Jesus responded when some Jews brought to Jesus an adulteress.
Early in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people were coming to Him; and He sat down and began to teach them. The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman caught in adultery, and having set her in the center of the court, they said to Him, "Teacher, this woman has been caught in adultery, in the very act. Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women; what then do You say?"
6 "They were saying this, testing Him, so that they might have grounds for accusing Him. But Jesus stooped down and with His finger wrote on the ground. But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, "He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." Again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. When they heard it, they began to go out one by one, beginning with the older ones, and He was left alone, and the woman, where she was, in the center of the court. Straightening up, Jesus said to her, "Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?" She said, "No one, Lord." And Jesus said, "I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more." NASU
I'm sure Jesus knew she committed adultery. However, the Mosaic Law required two witnesses to convict her of adultery. They who brought her to Jesus knew she committed adultery and they were prepared to be witnesses to this fact.
What changed their mind? I believe what changed their mind was what Jesus wrote in the dirt. Without outright accusing them to their face of their violations of the Mosaic Law, Jesus most likely wrote hints that each accuser recognized as a serious violation of the Mosaic Law with a significant punishment under the Mosaic Law. Thus each man who were going to be witness that this Woman did commit adultery, but Jesus knew about their own sins, and they, seeing Jesus knew their sins, in fear of being punished by the Mosaic Law themselves, they trickled away as each began to see their sin in the dirt.
Yes, I'm speculating, but it is a very reasonable speculation. For Jesus was not sent by the Father to condemn people, but to save them by taking away all their sins through His Blood shed on the cross. Jesus being the perfect Paschal Lamb.
| 2011/8/6 21:25||Profile|
| Re: |
Dear Twayne B, Christinyou, Martyr.
I'm in agreement with all your above posts here on page 7 of this thread.
I find it a great joy to be a Christian.
| 2011/8/6 21:36||Profile|
| Re: |
We are not to enforce the moral law as God in a penalty sense in the New Covenant, as Israel after the flesh was commanded. Christ's kingdom is not of this world whereas Israel under the Old Covenant was a kingdom of this world.
The fact remains that the moral law is still in place for those who are not led by the Spirit (1 Timothy 1:8-11). If the moral law were to not be regarded, then a professing Christian who was committing adultery/looking at pornography/lying/stealing, etc (any obvious transgression of the moral law) could rightfully be in fellowship with a true Christian church without any rebuke. After all, the law of God is not to be regarded (sarcasm). The New Testament says otherwise:
"But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person." (1 Corinthians 5:11-13)
if you were to say that a man led by the Spirit in fellowship with Christ would not be any of these things as he abides in Christ, I agree. However by saying so we are saying that transgression of the law and fellowship with Christ by the Spirit are mutually exclusive. Since that is so, we acknowledge the law is established by faith in Christ, though the law is not the means to righteousness; only Christ is. Yet in Christ the law is fulfilled. Thus the moral law is an absolutely necessary check as to whether we are walking with Christ. To disregard it is grave error and many will be damned who were deceived they did not need to repent of their sin because they believed the law of God was irrelevant and they believed their profession of Christ had nothing to do with their fulfillment of the law.
If you told an adulterer/pornography addict they needed to repent and forsake their adultery and they said "The law is irrelevant- I'm in Christ regardless, I've asked God to forgive me but I'm not going to give it up and I don't need to" (certainly a common occurrence within churches). What would you say to them? If you were to say insist on repentance (as you should) you are upholding the moral law of God as in force in the New Covenant (though not actually enforcing it by stoning as Israel was to do in the Old Covenant). Now if they said in brokenness "How can I be delivered from my sin?" and you pointed them to the law rather than to go to Christ for power to overcome you would be a legalist. It is not complicated.
"Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law." (Romans 3:31)
"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity (Greek: anomia- without law/lawlessness)." (Matthew 7:21-23- vss 24-27 show the will of the Father is Jesus' words, which Jesus made clear are the fulfilling of the law near the beginning of the sermon in Matthew 5:17-20).
| 2011/8/7 1:27||Profile|
Long Beach CA USA
| Re: |
"Oracio, my brother in Christ, what God is doing in me is being done for all Christians. I just can not picture you throwing stones at violators of the moral laws, stoning which itself is required by the moral laws."
Hello ArtB. The stoning from the common people in the Old Testament(example:Deut.22:20-24) was not part of the moral Law of God, it was part of the civil Law of Israel under the Theocracy of God. Romans 13:1-4 shows us that that civil law has now been revised in this age; only the civil governing authorities, not the common people, are given the right by God to use the sword in their execution of justice.
The moral Law is the 10 Commandments, the 4th one being fulfilled through resting in the finished work of Christ on the cross. All the other 9 are carried over into the New Testament. Here is a brief article which I thought explained it better than me:
"The Problem of Mosaic Laws as Commands for New Testament Believers
A careful reading of the New Testament shows us that nine of the Ten Commandments are repeated as obligations for believers. The one exception is the command to keep the Sabbath. If the Mosaic Law has been done away, then why are these commandments repeated in the New Testament? Further, some commandments outside the Ten Commandments are even repeated in the New Testament. For instance, as a motivation for loving others, Paul referred to four of the Ten Commandments because they demonstrate this principle, but then, to summarize, he mentioned one from Leviticus 19:18, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. So in what sense has the Law been done away?
Part of the purpose of the Law was to point men to the coming Savior through its shadows and types. Through the moral law, man could see Gods holy character as well as his own sinfulness and the infinite gulf that separates God and man. Through the ceremonial part of the Law (the priesthood, sacrifices, and tabernacle), man could find the solution to his sin by faith in what this part of the Law represented, a suffering Savior, one who would die as the Lamb of God. But even though no one could perfectly keep the Law, it was also designed for Israels immediate blessing by setting forth righteous principles that would show them how to love God and their fellow man. This would produce a stable and secure society as well as a testimony to the nations (Deut. 4:6-8).
Thus, in 613 commands the Mosaic Law represented an ethical code given by God to Israel to govern the nation until the coming of Messiah, but at their heart, they represented the moral law of Godrighteous principles vital to humanity. Today, we are not under this code, but many of its righteous principles, the eternal laws of God, have been carried over and are part of the law of the Spirit of life in Christ (Rom. 8:2) or the law of Christ (1 Cor. 9:21; Gal. 6:2). In this, some of the former commands are carried over (Rom. 13:9), some new commands and guidelines are added (Eph. 4:11f; 1 Tim. 3:1f; 4:4), and some have been revised, as in the case of capitol punishment which is to be exercised by human government (Rom. 13:4).
It needs to be emphasized that the end of the Mosaic law, including the Ten Commandments, does not cancel or detract one iota from the eternal moral law of God. The moral principles of the ten laws did not begin with Sinai but are as eternal and immutable as the character of God. To understand this should dispel the fears of those who think the abolition of the Mosaic law leaves only a state of lawlessness.
The moral principles embodied in the law of Moses Paul calls the righteousness of the law (Rom 8:4), and shows that such principles are the goal of the Spirit-directed life in the same context in which he teaches the believer is not under the Mosaic law (Rom 6 .
This should be no more difficult to understand than the fact that a citizen of the United States is not under the laws of Canada, even though the moral principles underlying the laws of the two countries are the same. When a citizen of the United States becomes a citizen of Canada he does not remain under ten of the best laws of the United States. Nor does the fact that some of the laws of the United States are quite similar to some of the laws of Canada confuse or compromise his new exclusive responsibility to Canada. So the believing Jew of the first century moved entirely from the Mosaic economy of law into the new economy of grace instituted by Jesus Christ (John 1:17)."
| 2011/8/8 18:11||Profile|
| Re: |
1Ti 1:8-11 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully; (9) Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, (10) For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; (11) According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
The law is absolutely in force for those who are lawless and disobedient. These people do not know God and are still lost in their sins. If we are born again we are led of the Spirit. The law does serve its purpose for these people. It convinces and convicts them of the fact that they are not righteous and have no hope of becoming righteous by living "good" lives.
Technically an unbeliever cannot be in the church as the church is comprised of all born again believers. If an unbeliever is actively fellowshipping in a local body and this continues for a long time I might question if that local body is functioning correctly and has the right priorities. I would like to think that the intimate fellowship that scripture describes in the local body would preclude an unbeliever being able to remain in close fellowship in the body for long without being challenged. I am talking only about the local fellowship and not about the obvious relationships with the world that we need to have in which we are in process of reaching them for Christ.
It is true that to a certain extent the law can restrain sin, although that depends on how much these people regard any form of moral absolute which is becoming more rare all the time. The real restraining work of the law was in the time between its inception and the coming of Jesus the Messiah. Believers no longer need a law to restrain sin because we have the inner witness and promptings of the Holy Spirit and are motivated by love and relationship rather than by punishment.
I believe the check on whether we are walking with God will be the check of the Holy Spirit and not the letter of the law. Oh how many times have I done something that the Holy Spirit checked me on and I have felt the immediate gnawing in my spirit that I have transgressed and I have to repent. This is not to say that we do not recognize certain things as right and others as wrong. There are absolutes that we know both from the law and from the dealings of the Holy Spirit. But really I think that in saying that I have come so far down the line from where we began that I question if we are not now talking about apples and oranges. The fact that these things that we simply recognize as right and wrong come from the same source as the written law and agree with the law does not necessarily imply that we are still in any way living under the law but rather that we are now in intimate relationship with the law giver.
| 2011/8/8 19:08||Profile|