LAW

[JLB]

As everyone continues to engage in this endless debate on the law, I do not think we should so lightly disregard the verse from Heb 8:11, which is a quote taken from the prophet in Jer 31:34. What does it mean when the Lord tells us through his prophet that we SHALL NOT teach every man his neighbor saying: Know the Lord?

Why would he not want us to teach every man his neighbor?

Teaching our neighbor and teaching our neighbor to know the Lord when He Himself dwells within each of us, are two different things.

We are to teach each other, as each of us "knows in part", so we share with each other the part that we know.

The goal being that "we" collectively have the mind of Christ.

However we don't need to teach each other to know the Lord, for He dwells in each of us and we who have the Spirit of Christ do know Him.


JLB

 

[JLB]

The 'rest' that the author is referring to is the rest that remains to be entered into for those who have entered into the rest of the literal promised land--the one Joshua gave them. The rest remaining to be entered into is 'Today', the Day of Salvation. It isn't enough to just enter into the literal Land. There's another rest after that which these Hebrews must not be found to have fallen short of.

Thanks for sharing your opinion with us.

Rest comes when all of your enemies are defeated and you have peace with no war.

The Lord through Joshua defeated the enemies of Israel in that literal land, yet the scripture clearly says - For if Joshua had given them rest, then He would not afterward have spoken of another day.

The Day of rest will come when all the wicked of the earth are removed along with the devil and his angels !

That seventh Day will last for one thousand years, as it is written...

A Day to the Lord is as a thousand years, and a thousand years is as a Day.


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

We are to teach each other, as each of us "knows in part", so we share with each other the part that we know.

And when someone shares their part I, and everybody else, have in this New Covenant an anointing to know whether it is the truth or a lie. I don't need someone to tell me 'this is the truth'. The Holy Spirit will let me know that.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Thanks for sharing your opinion with us.


JLB

And, depending on how pure a person's heart is, the Holy Spirit will tell them what is truth and what is error in what I said. Just as it is for what you share here.

 

[JLB]

And when someone shares their part I, and everybody else, have in this New Covenant an anointing to know whether it is the truth or a lie. I don't need someone to tell me 'this is the truth'. The Holy Spirit will let me know that.

Sounds familiar.

Thanks for making my point.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

The Lord through Joshua defeated the enemies of Israel in that literal land, yet the scripture clearly says - For if Joshua had given them rest, then He would not afterward have spoken of another day.

....yes, another day called 'Today', not tomorrow, though it's certainly true that there is much more to the 'Today' of salvation coming than we have now.

 

[Deborah13]

What law do we establish by being in Christ. My answer is 'the law of God', which we see perfectly manifested in the Messiah.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

What law do we establish by being in Christ. My answer is 'the law of God', which we see perfectly manifested in the Messiah.

The law of Moses. Paul says when we love others we fulfill all the Commandments, some of which quoted right out of the OT scriptures.

 

[Deborah13]

The law of Moses. Paul says when we love others we fulfill all the Commandments, some of which quoted right out of the OT scriptures.

I find a problem in this interpretation.
The Law of Moses says that a man CAN have more than one wife at the SAME time.
So I see that that law was OK by God for a time but is not OK under the new covenant. Paul says, the Elder will be the husband of ONE wife.
"Thou shall not commit adultery." And the Pharisee (the rich young ruler) says, "I have lived that law perfectly." Jesus says, "If you have thought about it you have committed it."
Jesus raised the bar above what the Law of Moses said. To a place of absolute perfection.

So I think that what we establish is this absolute perfect law of God, Jesus Himself being this absolute perfect law of God manifested in the flesh. The Messiah, the perfect Torah.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I find a problem in this interpretation.
The Law of Moses says that a man CAN have more than one wife at the SAME time.
So I see that that law was OK by God for a time but is not OK under the new covenant. Paul says, the Elder will be the husband of ONE wife.
"Thou shall not commit adultery." And the Pharisee (the rich young ruler) says, "I have lived that law perfectly." Jesus says, "If you have thought about it you have committed it."
Jesus raised the bar above what the Law of Moses said. To a place of absolute perfection.

So I think that what we establish is this absolute perfect law of God, Jesus Himself being this absolute perfect law of God manifested in the flesh. The Messiah, the perfect Torah.

When we consider the whole of Paul's teaching about the law of Moses there's no reason to think he meant faith upholds the letter of the law because he's quite clear about various first covenant stipulations and governance being laid aside because the way of faith has appeared. And we know the priesthood was allowed to pass rabbinical decisions down, adding them to the law. The allowance for divorce, for example, was actually a rabbinical add-on to the law of Moses. So, in the end, we know the establishing of the law does not mean the establishing of the letter of the law. And we know that the Spirit filled life actually takes the standard of righteousness above and beyond the righteousness required in the law.

But the reason I think Paul is saying faith upholds the law of Moses is because that is the very context of the passage where he says that:

"19 Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; 20 because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin.

21 But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; 25 whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; 26 for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. 27 Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. 28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. 29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30 since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one. 31 Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law." (Romans 3:19-31 NASB)

For him to be referring to the law of Moses specifically in all these places where he says 'law', but to then suddenly mean a different 'law' in the last sentence is grammatically and logically unreasonable. The bottom line is, we know Paul is not talking about faith upholding the letter of the law, but rather the righteousness of the law.


The following illustrates how unreasonable it is to say Paul means a different law of God other than the law of Moses is what gets established by faith. Surely you agree 'the law' in the two sentences in verse 31 have to be the same law, so let's see how awkward it becomes if we change the law that gets 'established' to a different law than what gets 'not nullified':

"31 Do we then nullify the Law (of Moses--the law that can not justify) through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish (a different law) the Law (of God)."

See? The law that may never be nullified by faith has to also be the law that gets established by faith. Otherwise the verse makes no grammatical or logical sense. We just need to remember he's talking about the righteousness of the law, not the letter of the law.

 

[JLB]

The law of Moses. Paul says when we love others we fulfill all the Commandments, some of which quoted right out of the OT scriptures.

So now the law of Moses is back.

Obsolete and vanished away.

The law was added until the Seed...

The law and the prophets were until John, since that time the kingdom of God is preached.

U-N-T-I-L !

"Until" indicates a temporary status of the thing described.


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

So now the law of Moses is back.

Obsolete and vanished away.

The law was added until the Seed...

The law and the prophets were until John, since that time the kingdom of God is preached.

U-N-T-I-L !

"Until" indicates a temporary status of the thing described.


JLB

No, the righteousness of the law of Moses is back. In fact, it never left.

Faith in Christ does not nullify the righteousness of the law, it establishes and upholds it. I cite your response to this teaching to illustrate once again how the church in general can only understand the law of Moses in terms of the letter of the law of Moses and, therefore, casts it completely and utterly away, and then creates doctrines to try and fill the hole left by doing that.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.
31 Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law." (Romans 3:28,31 NASB)

It's easy to see, grammatically, that the law Paul says does not get nullified through faith, and the law that gets established (through faith) are the very same law.

Even though we can not be declared to be a righteous person (that is, justified) by doing the righteousness of the law of Moses, faith in Christ will walk in the righteousness found in the law of Moses. Again, we know from the whole context of scripture that he's not talking about the letter of the law of Moses, but the righteous requirements of God themselves revealed in the law of Moses. Faith 'keeps' those righteous requirements, not nullifies them. Nullify them? "May it never be!"

 

[th1b.taylor]

When we consider the whole of Paul's teaching about the law of Moses there's no reason to think he meant faith upholds the letter of the law because he's quite clear about various first covenant stipulations and governance being laid aside because the way of faith has appeared. And we know the priesthood was allowed to pass rabbinical decisions down, adding them to the law. The allowance for divorce, for example, was actually a rabbinical add-on to the law of Moses. So, in the end, we know the establishing of the law does not mean the establishing of the letter of the law. And we know that the Spirit filled life actually takes the standard of righteousness above and beyond the righteousness required in the law.

But the reason I think Paul is saying faith upholds the law of Moses is because that is the very context of the passage where he says that:

"19 Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; 20 because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin.

21 But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; 25 whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; 26 for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. 27 Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. 28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. 29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30 since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one. 31 Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law." (Romans 3:19-31 NASB)

For him to be referring to the law of Moses specifically in all these places where he says 'law', but to then suddenly mean a different 'law' in the last sentence is grammatically and logically unreasonable. The bottom line is, we know Paul is not talking about faith upholding the letter of the law, but rather the righteousness of the law.


The following illustrates how unreasonable it is to say Paul means a different law of God other than the law of Moses is what gets established by faith. Surely you agree 'the law' in the two sentences in verse 31 have to be the same law, so let's see how awkward it becomes if we change the law that gets 'established' to a different law than what gets 'not nullified':

"31 Do we then nullify the Law (of Moses--the law that can not justify) through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish (a different law) the Law (of God)."

See? The law that may never be nullified by faith has to also be the law that gets established by faith. Otherwise the verse makes no grammatical or logical sense. We just need to remember he's talking about the righteousness of the law, not the letter of the law.

A better case I could not have made. There are different views that can be, rightfully, established of the Law but extinct in never one of them. If this were true God would not have them written on our hearts to learn from.

I, from the day of my conversion, have held two views precious. The first is that in the Ten, cast the other 603 aside right now, are the most beautiful word painting of the Christ I have ever read. (and of course there is not a better illustration, He authored this) The other, more complicated view (and if some must, okay, toss the 603 examples of usage in) this was and remains our teacher of Sin that should, always, lead us to return to Righteousness.

May God bless His instruction to every heart.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

A better case I could not have made. There are different views that can be, rightfully, established of the Law but extinct in never one of them. If this were true God would not have them written on our hearts to learn from.

I, from the day of my conversion, have held two views precious. The first is that in the Ten, cast the other 603 aside right now, are the most beautiful word painting of the Christ I have ever read. (and of course there is not a better illustration, He authored this) The other, more complicated view (and if some must, okay, toss the 603 examples of usage in) this was and remains our teacher of Sin that should, always, lead us to return to Righteousness.

May God bless His instruction to every heart.

(For lack of a 'like' button)
Jethro Bodine likes this.

 

[th1b.taylor]

So now the law of Moses is back.

Obsolete and vanished away.

The law was added until the Seed...

The law and the prophets were until John, since that time the kingdom of God is preached.

U-N-T-I-L !

"Until" indicates a temporary status of the thing described.


JLB

JLB,
Always on the attack is blinding. Neither Jethro nor I have ever preached nor taught a return to the Law of God but neither have we, as you appear to do here, preached the abandonment of what the Messiah taught and still teaches through His Word, the Bible. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus spelled it out that He was fulfilling the Law and was not doing away with the Law. And when the young ruler asked for the greatest Jesus boiled the Ten, casting the 603 examples to the side, down into two.

Please (Edited, ToS 2.14, unwelcome spiritual advice. Obadiah) read the scriptures in their context, please.

 

[JLB]

No, the righteousness of the law of Moses is back. In fact, it never left.

Faith in Christ does not nullify the righteousness of the law, it establishes and upholds it. I cite your response to this teaching to illustrate once again how the church in general can only understand the law of Moses in terms of the letter of the law of Moses and, therefore, casts it completely and utterly away, and then creates doctrines to try and fill the hole left by doing that.

For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. Romans 10:4

The law of God, which was before the law of Moses and pertained to every man, which was seen in the law of Moses, has never left.

The law was added, which contained ordinances, that are now obsolete, and where specifically for the natural offspring of Abraham.


The law of God is eternal.

The law of Moses was temporary.


The righteous requirements of God's commandments and laws and precepts that where contained within the law of Moses are eternal.


When you are able to rightly divide between those two, you will be a very powerful voice to this generation who have embraced lawlessness through corrupt teaching.


JLB

 

[th1b.taylor]

1 What then shall we say that our father Abraham has found, according to flesh? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has a boast; but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness." 4 But to him working, the reward is not reckoned according to grace, but according to debt. 5 But to him not working, but believing on Him justifying the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. 6 Even as David also says of the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness without works, 7 saying, "Blessed are those whose lawlessnesses are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; 8 blessed is the man to whom the Lord will in no way impute sin."

9 Is this blessedness then on the circumcision only, or on the uncircumcision also? For we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. 10 How then was it reckoned? Being in circumcision or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. 11 And he received a sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith while still uncircumcised; so that he might be the father of all those believing through uncircumcision, for righteousness to be imputed to them also; 12 and a father of circumcision to those not of the circumcision only, but also to those walking by the steps of the faith of our father Abraham during uncircumcision.(MKJV

The Christ/ the Messiah is indeed the end of the Law, asolute truth but if anyone reads this and does not prayerfully meditate or does not have the indwelling and therefore the leading of the Holy Spirit is prone to misread this passage. I know that it is the general rule of man to ignore the truth that the Bible is of one context from beginning to end but that truth must never be ignore because ikt is a case for quenching the Spirit... a thing we are admonished from doing.

The view of Jesus being the End of the Law is, period, there is no more after Him! Any other view defies logic and places the words of Jesus, words He has protected form the beginning, useless. Jesus, Himself, admonished the idea that the Law was of no value when He instructed His Disciples that He came not to abolish the Law but to fulfill it.

Jesus is the living example we, the Followers of Jesus! Jesus fulfilled the Law as that example. There is way to much preaching/teaching that we can never fulfill/obey the Law of God. This is a true statement but is, way, over taught and has resulted in an incorrect view of obedience to God. Though I am, fully, aware that I will not fulfill the Law before I am gifted the Glotrfied Body, I practice Perfection because I am called to that purpose as a follower of the Most High.

 

[Deborah13]

No, the righteousness of the law of Moses is back. In fact, it never left.

Faith in Christ does not nullify the righteousness of the law, it establishes and upholds it. I cite your response to this teaching to illustrate once again how the church in general can only understand the law of Moses in terms of the letter of the law of Moses and, therefore, casts it completely and utterly away, and then creates doctrines to try and fill the hole left by doing that.

What holes do you see that are left?
Are you saying that there was no moral law of God before the Law of Moses?
Are you saying there were holes in God's law before the Law of Moses?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. Romans 10:4

Note, "for righteousness". Christ is the end of the erroneous thinking that right standing with God can be obtained through keeping the law of Moses for righteousness. Read it:

"3 For not knowing about God's righteousness and seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes." (Romans 10:3-4 NASB)

For those who believe in Christ, right standing with God (justification) comes by their faith in Christ to wipe away their unrighteous standing with God and replace it with Christ's. Those who don't believe depend on the performance of the righteous requirements of the law to be right before God--that is the 'end of the law' that Paul is plainly talking about in the passage. Read it.

The end of the law does not mean believers now don't have to do righteous things required by the law. That's ludicrous. And because everybody knows that's obviously ludicrous, man has invented so many misguided explanations to fill the gap of logic left by the indoctrination that the law of Moses is utterly and completely irrelevant to the people of God in this New Covenant yet we still have to keep things required in the law of Moses.

The law of God, which was before the law of Moses and pertained to every man, which was seen in the law of Moses, has never left.

The law was added, which contained ordinances, that are now obsolete, and where specifically for the natural offspring of Abraham.

The first covenant is what was made obsolete. Not the law of God found in the law of Moses. For some reason you have this problem that we can't call 'do not murder' the law of Moses. If faith upholds the exact same law of 'do not murder' before and during the law of Moses it's quite accurate to say that faith upholds the law of Moses. It's not a different law of 'do not murder' in the law of Moses than before the law of Moses. It's okay to call it the law of Moses. Paul does.

The law of God is eternal.

The law of Moses was temporary.

The first covenant of temple, priesthood, and sacrifice was temporary. The law of Moses it was couched in is the eternal law of God. You just have a misguided and prejudiced resistance to calling 'do not murder' the law of Moses. Even though Paul does.