Drew said:
Well, this may be the first time that I will disagree with you my distinguished fellow hockey fan. Well, perhaps, I am not sure.
LOL! We'll see!
Drew said:
Shamelessly stealing the thoughts of NT Wright, I will suggest that the law was given in order to "shine a light on human sin", concentrate all of humanity's sin onto the Jews, and then pass it onto Jesus shoulders, who alone bore the sin of all the world. Because of Adam's disobedience, human nature was fundamentally changed in such a way that obeying the law, at least to some reasonable degree of compliance, was rendered essentially impossible.
I do not like arguing against Mr. Wright, he is highly respected and I admire some of his writings. However, I cannot help but think he is overly influenced by the classic Lutheran paradigm that man is a pile of manure. This anthropology, while it certainly seems to exist in some of the Psalms, is not the overriding view that the Bible has regarding mankind. Sure, we are sinners, we cannot help but sin, we are wounded... But the Law's purpose was to show man that he couldn't obey God? That would be strange and in contradiction to the many places where the Bible says man CAN obey God - with God's help. I would consider this purpose as secondary to the REAL purpose of the Law - to prepare men for the Law of Love.
I ask you to consider glancing at Psalm 119 and the praise of God's Law. After reading it, do you think that the sacred author thought that man COULD NOT obey God's Law, or that the just man considered it as something that showed how useless and a sinner he was? While this view has its proponents in Western Christianity, it is unheard of in the East, as far as I know from my experience with Eastern Orthodox Christians. Patristic thought in the East had a pretty high view of mankind. Thus, I believe this is more a Western phenomenom, one that probably took birth with Anselm's Atonement view. That is my hypothesis, although it is Luther who really pushed the issue.
Drew said:
Having said this, I am not sure how what I have said is relevant to the subject at hand. Even though I think the primary function of the law is as I have described, I see no reason to conclude that the moral aspects of it are not still binding on us, and I still think that a person who makes no (or an insufficient) effort to keep the law (the moral elements, not the "ceremonial" elements) is in danger of the fire. I have always thought it rather odd that a person under grace would not see the law as a good thing, a standard to be pursued, even if he believes that his inability to keep it in its entirety has been covered by grace. If you do not try to keep the law, are you really under grace? Perhaps you never were or you have slipped away.
Paul is adamant that the Law continues, that Christ did NOT come to destroy it, but to fulfill it. I think if we look at Romans 2, we might gain some insight here on the subject. Consider that God gave PAGANS the Law, written on their hearts. The written Law, given by Moses, was to be obeyed. Now, Paul does have negative things to say about the WRITTEN Law, but not the Law written on the heart. Jeremiah and Ezekiel also speak about this Law that would be written on our hearts, a new covenant. God's Spirit, then, is to be obeyed! We obey the Law, the Spirit, written on our hearts. At that point, we become spiritual Jews, circumcised in the heart.
Thus, the written Law was a teacher for the Jews so they would know God's will in a more decisive way, rather than relying on one's own personal conscience (clouded as it was by original sin). Through this Law, as Psalms 119 proposes, we please God. Through faith that was available even to pagans, but more formally, to the Jews, so as to form a people as a beacon to the world, one that would bring forth a savior. Thus, in my humble opinion, the Law was a preparation for the coming Messiah, a "proto-evangelium" that prepared mankind for the coming of the ultimate revelation of God's Will - Jesus Christ.
Jesus never mentions that the Law's purpose is to show man how lost he is. He tells us that this Old Covenant is NOT to be abrogated, not one dot. Thus, there is ANOTHER purpose, since it remains in effect even after Christ's death and resurrection.
Go Sabres!
Regards