SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Did Jesus teach a higher Law?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next Page )
PosterThread
gt768
Member



Joined: 2019/6/12
Posts: 37


 Re: twayneb(3rd post)

Romans 10:4 doesn't teach the Old Testament law is taken away- it teaches that Christ is the end (i.e. goal) of that law. Christ Himself fulfills that law (Matthew 5:17-20) and leads His people to fulfill the morality of that law (Romans 8:2-4). Being more like Jesus does indeed mean being a better law-keeper- not in the outward Judaizing sense, rather in the sense of walking in spirit and truth.

"Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy law is the truth." (Psalm 119:142)

"God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." (John 4:24)

You are not correct on effort there and what you are actually preaching is Calvinistic irresistible grace. We need to put forth effort, not self-effort that opposes God's grace, rather effort that cooperates with God's grace. We have to deny sin, we have to choose to seek the Lord, choose right, etc CONSTANTLY. Otherwise our failures would be His fault rather than our own.

God's work on man and in man necessitates man's surrender and active cooperation. Acceptable Christian living otherwise is a delusion and a fantasy.

Titus 2:11-14 "11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, 12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; 13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; 14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works."

It doesn't say He denies ungodliness and worldly lusts for us and that He lives soberly, righteously, and godly for us.

Colossians 1:27-29 "27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: 28 Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus: 29 Whereunto I also labour, striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily."

Hence Paul could say in truth shortly before his death: 2 Timothy 4:7-8 "7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: 8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing."

 2019/6/25 17:31Profile
gt768
Member



Joined: 2019/6/12
Posts: 37


 Re: Sree

Sree, God never accepted David's adultery! Have you not read how God rebuked David so harshly, how David repented so deeply, and how David suffered so miserably as God chastened him for it and his many other related sins? And David's seed never had the throne unconditionally. Have you never read how God chastened David's disobedient seed and carried them away to Babylon as they lost the throne after that and have not to this day ever received it back? God never set David up as an example in the time of his life when he was in adultery.

There was never an excuse for David to fall into adultery and your understanding of Scripture is justifying him in it. That is a great slander upon God and I hope you'll consider and repent from this slander.

 2019/6/25 17:38Profile
Sree
Member



Joined: 2011/8/20
Posts: 1711


 Re:

Quote:

Sree, First of all, I never said that the Law in the OT was corrupt.



I too never said you that you mentioned it anywhere! I think I understand exactly where you come from. I only do not find you logically consistent.

I meant that Jesus did not respond to corrupt interpretation of the law, he quoted the exact words of the law and gave a higher standard than what was written. The phrase 'But I tell you' is clear, that he is telling something new.

Quote:

Your child analogy is not comparable to our discussion, as the standard of morality for the child never changed, only the trust of the parent for the child as he grew.


Am not sure how you say the standard never changed. I never use the term morality in any of my post. Moral standards are way bellow Biblical standards.

If you see a pig tied by chains to prevent it from falling into gutter and another pig that has no chains but chooses not to even get near the gutter; you know which is higher standard. It is foolish to say both the pigs are same since they both do not fall into gutter!

My 15 year old chooses by his own will not to watch anything unclean. He understands how it hurts his father's heart. This is NT standard, we are not chained by laws, yet we live a pure life inside out.

My analogy of Child using a laptop is the closest I can get to explain my point here. It is inline with what Paul spoke about Law being a school master.

Also I never said Jesus preached a law. Jesus did not give us a law but a standard. He lived a highest standard of life ever possible and preached the same. This standard was higher than that of OT.

Quote:

They knew he wanted truth in the inward parts because that is what the law required, not because they searched God beyond His laws. You are implicitly accusing them of practicing Gnosticism- the concept that there is a secret knowledge of God that man can find beyond the written Word of God.



Going by your understanding Paul was also preaching Gnosticism here!

Romans 1 :19- that which is known about God is evident [m]within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being UNDERSTOOD THROUGH WHAT HAS BEEN MADE, so that they are without excuse.

Paul writes that the nature of God and his attibutes can be understood by seeing his work of creation. This is written to unbeleivers who do not know OT or NT. I myself can testify to this word. I did not hear the Gospel until I was 25 as I was raised as a Hindu. But I know God hated my actions even though they were perfectly acceptable according to Hinduism. I do not believe I had any excuse if I died without hearing the Gospel.

The Book of Job has no reference to Abharam or Moses or laws. Still Job lived an upright and blameless life. How did he come to know this? God can be found by those who search for him with all their heart. Not just those who search in Bible!


_________________
Sreeram

 2019/6/25 18:06Profile
Sree
Member



Joined: 2011/8/20
Posts: 1711


 Re:

Titus 1:5 For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint elders in every city as I directed you, 6 namely, if any man is above reproach, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, not accused of dissipation or rebellion. 7 For the [d]overseer must be above reproach as God’s steward,

This is the condition that Paul says to be an elder or a spiritual leader in a Church. Now Abharam and Jacob were people accepted by God under OT. God was not ashamed to be called their God. Now if Abharam with his multiple Concubines lived in the time of Paul, do you think Paul would have made him and elder? Will he not fail the condition of having only one wife? Same way Jacob will also not fail? Even Noah who got dunk and laid naked will be rejected by Paul because of his addiction to alcohol!

What does this prove here. Even people who were great men under OT were ineligible to be a spiritual leader in a Church under NT. This proves that NT standard is way higher.


_________________
Sreeram

 2019/6/25 18:15Profile
Sree
Member



Joined: 2011/8/20
Posts: 1711


 Re:

Quote:

Sree, God never accepted David's adultery! Have you not read how God rebuked David so harshly, how David repented so deeply, and how David suffered so miserably as God chastened him for it and his many other related sins? And David's seed never had the throne unconditionally. Have you never read how God chastened David's disobedient seed and carried them away to Babylon as they lost the throne after that and have not to this day ever received it back? God never set David up as an example in the time of his life when he was in adultery.

There was never an excuse for David to fall into adultery and your understanding of Scripture is justifying him in it. That is a great slander upon God and I hope you'll consider and repent from this slander.



Wow, when did you hear me even justifying David? Irrespective of David repenting or not, it is a fact that God accepted him. So if our standard of requirement from God is same as that of David, then it should be perfectly right for a new covenant person to also commit Adultery and then repent or even accept chastisement and take David as his example.

But thankfully, our standard of requirement is higher than that of David. David did not have the fullness of Holy Spirit that only believers in NT received after the day of Pentecost. He did not have that relationship with God that NT believers have.

Quote:

2 Sam 12:8 I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms. I gave you all Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more.



When David sinned, the above was God's word to him. Here God is clearly telling David that he would have given him more wives and property if he had asked! Can a person living a new covenant life, marry another women and then tell that God gave him like he gave to David, then will you accept him?

If God's Standard for David is same as that of you and I then we should also hear God saying he will give us multiple wives if we are not happy with one!


_________________
Sreeram

 2019/6/25 18:35Profile
InTheLight
Member



Joined: 2003/7/31
Posts: 2734
Phoenix, Arizona USA

 Re: Did Jesus teach a higher Law?

Here is a quote from Poul Madsen, here is a higher standard;

The gospel is God's own righteousness. In it is revealed the righteousness of God or righteousness from God. It is not a means which we can use to become righteous in ourselves, but it gives us righteousness from God by faith and unto faith. In this way the law is fulfilled. The gospel, therefore, does not confront us with the law, but with Christ. He who believes the gospel is righteous before God for time and eternity. He has not first to win righteousness, for he is fully righteous. He does not have to prove that he is fulfilling the law, for God's righteousness needs no proofs. The law has no demands to make on such a man; he is not living within its sphere and is not occupied with its "Thou shalts" and its "Thou shalt nots", but is filled with the love of God in Christ Jesus.

In Christ,


_________________
Ron Halverson

 2019/6/25 19:57Profile
savannah
Member



Joined: 2008/10/30
Posts: 1986


 Re: The Law summarized;



The Law summarized;


“Teacher, which commandment is the greatest in the Law?”

Jesus declared, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” Matthew 22:36-40

There is no higher Law!

It was Love "In the beginning..."

Because "God is Love."

Learn this simple lesson!

 2019/6/25 21:56Profile
gt768
Member



Joined: 2019/6/12
Posts: 37


 Re: Savannah

Agreed! Nothing God has ever commanded has been short of perfect love. To command otherwise would be against His nature and a concession to man's sin. He expects us to do as He has said and it is evil to do otherwise. His wrath is just against those who refuse to walk in the light of His Law. Loving God, walking by faith in Christ, and keeping His commandments are inseparable

2 John 6- "6 And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it."

3 John 11- "11 Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God"

 2019/6/25 23:48Profile
gt768
Member



Joined: 2019/6/12
Posts: 37


 Re: Sree (1st of 3 responses)

You wrote "I meant that Jesus did not respond to corrupt interpretation of the law, he quoted the exact words of the law and gave a higher standard than what was written. The phrase 'But I tell you' is clear, that he is telling something new."

Okay, you surely see the point of conflict correctly. But I say unto you that Jesus was indeed rebuking corrupt interpretations of God's Law and not teaching a higher law.
I'll prove it:

Matthew 5:21-22 "21 Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: 22 But I say unto you..."

Matthew 5:21 is not a quote from the Old Testament after the "thou shalt not kill" You can't show it to us because it is not there. Jesus is rebuking the narrow interpretation of murder by the corrupt Jewish rabbis that limited murder to the action and not the thoughts and intents of the heart. I quoted Leviticus 19:17-18 before to prove that the Law of Moses did indeed teach against malicious anger, hatred, grudges, etc. 1 John 3:14-15 shows how from the beginning "14 We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death. 15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him." That's a lesson from the beginning of the Bible and no one who is honest would think Cain would have been a righteous man if he had hated his brother and expressed his malice in a less obvious way than the act of murder (though obviously he greatly increased his sin and guilt by that).

Matthew 5:27-28 "27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
28 But I say unto you..." It's obvious even here that He was rebuking the corrupt rabbinical teaching which limited adultery to the physical act. How do I know? Because the Old Testament taught against lust and any spiritual Jew who knew the Scriptures would have already known that. To say that was teaching something new by saying that lust is adultery you'd have to cut Proverbs 6:23-25 out of the Bible. "23 For the commandment is a lamp; and the law is light; and reproofs of instruction are the way of life: 24 To keep thee from the evil woman, from the flattery of the tongue of a strange woman. 25 Lust not after her beauty in thine heart; neither let her take thee with her eyelids." Proverbs is a meditation on the practical applications of the Law of Moses and even Job knew without a Bible that lusting after women is evil and refrained from doing so (Job 31:1)

Matthew 5:31-32 "31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
32 But I say unto you..." Like with 5:21, Jesus is quoting the corrupt rabbinical teachers' misquoting of the Bible. They were misquoting Deuteronomy chapter 24 to imply that a man could lawfully just divorce his wife for any cause. Read Deuteronomy 24:1 and see that there was a narrow provision for divorce that the corrupt rabbis were expanding and thus abusing by their misquoting of Moses' Law.

Matthew 5:33-34 "33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:34 But I say unto you..." This was again a misquoting of the Law of Moses by the corrupt rabbis. The Law commanded to swear by God's name (Deuteronomy 6:13). The misquoting of the Law was a clever way for the rabbis to teach that you could swear by heaven, Jerusalem, your head, etc and the oath wasn't binding because (they claimed) God's name wasn't involved and so not keeping the oath was not taking his name in vain. Jesus rebuked this misconception. In Malachi chapter 3 it said that the Messiah would rebuke false sweraers. Malachi 3:5-6 "5 And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger from his right, and fear not me, saith the Lord of hosts. 6 For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed."

Matthew 5:38-39 "38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say unto you.." The corrupt rabbis were justifying personal vengeance by twisting the laws which in their context were to be carried out by impartial judges. They were saying in their twisting of Scripture that this justified a man independently taking vengeance on his enemies. Jesus was not speaking against impartial law and order, punishment of criminals nor saying that victims of crimes cannot go to the Judges to deal with their enemies when they were really victims of crimes. Romans chapter 13 shows how all of this is upheld in Christianity.

Matthew 5:43-44 "43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
44 But I say unto you..." This was a blatant misquotation of the OT on the part of the corrupt rabbis. The Law of moses never said "hate thine enemy." Rather it commanded love of one's enemies exactly as Jesus taught (since He came not to destroy the Law!) Exodus 23:4-5 "4 If thou meet thine enemy's ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again. 5 If thou see the ass of him that hateth thee lying under his burden, and wouldest forbear to help him, thou shalt surely help with him."

I'll also note that people can (and do) limit and abuse Jesus' words in the Gospels just like they have with Jesus' words through Moses (Jesus obviously inspired ALL of Scripture). Did Jesus say not to lust after a picture of a woman? Not exactly, there wasn't photos or videos then- but Matthew 5:28 and many other Scriptures rebuke doing in principle as adultery. What about lusting after a 17 year old who is not legally a woman yet? Is that okay? Of course not. But am I teaching a higher law than Jesus by saying it's wrong to lust after a minor as well as a woman? Of course not. I'm only looking at His words honestly in principle and not limiting them to the letter as an attempt to justify sin. And that is all Jesus was doing in the Sermon on the Mount to rebuke error and vindicate God's Law from the corrupt interpretations and abuses of it that were prevalent in His day.

To the rest of your post: You wrote "Am not sure how you say the standard never changed. I never use the term morality in any of my post. Moral standards are way bellow Biblical standards."

Biblical standards that deal with morality are moral standards. There is however a difference between being moral before the world versus moral before God.

You wrote "If you see a pig tied by chains to prevent it from falling into gutter and another pig that has no chains but chooses not to even get near the gutter; you know which is higher standard. It is foolish to say both the pigs are same since they both do not fall into gutter!"

This is not comparable to what we have been talking about. God doesn't bind men in chains (in this life) to prevent them from sinning, except that it's His will for criminals against society to be punished by the State (Romans 13). He gives men freedom to choose to serve Him and follow His Law or to serve the devil and do evil- in this life. All are held to the same standard without respect of persons though some understood more than others- and that will be factored into His judgments on Judgment Day. Do you not believe in an everlasting burning hell where those who have chosen evil will go forever?

You wrote "My analogy of Child using a laptop is the closest I can get to explain my point here. It is inline with what Paul spoke about Law being a school master. Also I never said Jesus preached a law. Jesus did not give us a law but a standard. He lived a highest standard of life ever possible and preached the same. This standard was higher than that of OT."

There is no significant difference between a law and a standard. The OT Law was a reflection of His own character which cannot be improved upon. Psalm 119:142 again. Jesus even kept the OT ceremonies, dietary laws, etc as a faithful Old Covenant Jew.

You wrote: " Going by your understanding Paul was also preaching Gnosticism here! Romans 1 :19- that which is known about God is evident [m]within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being UNDERSTOOD THROUGH WHAT HAS BEEN MADE, so that they are without excuse. Paul writes that the nature of God and his attibutes can be understood by seeing his work of creation. This is written to unbeleivers who do not know OT or NT. I myself can testify to this word. I did not hear the Gospel until I was 25 as I was raised as a Hindu. But I know God hated my actions even though they were perfectly acceptable according to Hinduism. I do not believe I had any excuse if I died without hearing the Gospel. The Book of Job has no reference to Abharam or Moses or laws. Still Job lived an upright and blameless life. How did he come to know this? God can be found by those who search for him with all their heart. Not just those who search in Bible!"

Romans was written to believers but the particular verses you quoted are written of unbelievers. You are right for the most part in what you say then, yet there's a key distinction you're not acknowledging- and if you did acknowledge it you'd have to acknowledge how crazy it is to believe Jesus taught a higher standard than Moses' law. In my previous post I was rebuking those who have a Bible seeking knowledge of God beyond their Bible. That would indeed be gnosticism. But how do people who have not a Bible know about God and His laws? Because Creation testifies there is a God and God's law is written in their hearts. And that is THE VERY SAME Law that is contained in the moral commandments of the Law of Moses and throughout the whole Bible. It is a reflection of God's perfect nature and contains His eternal requirements. For this reason it can never be improved upon and is consistent from Genesis to Revelation. Note in the very next chapter from what you quoted from, how the things the gentiles know by nature are the very same requirements contained in the Law of Moses.

" 14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)"

 2019/6/26 0:53Profile
gt768
Member



Joined: 2019/6/12
Posts: 37


 Re: Sree (2nd post)

The Bible never says that Noah had an addiction to alcohol. It is quite possible that the fermentation process of the vineyards was different after the flood and that he got drunk just one time by accident. That aside, the differences from OT to NT on polygamy do not prove a higher standard. The Lord never commanded polygamy in the OT. It was an aberration of marriage which he permitted for many reasons known to Him. Now polygamy is illegal in the USA and many countries; and since it's not required it shouldn't be allowed at all in the church in these countries. However note that polygamists were permitted to be grandfathered into the Apostolic churches though they couldn't be leaders. That proves that polygamy is not inherently sin. Even today there are countries where polygamy is legal and men who are polygamists come to Christ. They can't be leaders but they can still be grandfathered into the churches without putting away their wives. This isn't a matter of the standard changing; it is a matter that we have more light on God's unchanging goals and intents for marriage and of the bad consequences of the aberration that is polygamy. It's right to contain where it already exists and to stamp it out otherwise- but that was always the case though some otherwise spiritual men didn't perceive this and perhaps God hid it from them for reasons known to Him.

Question for you: Would you claim to be a more spiritual man than Abraham was?

 2019/6/26 1:04Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy