• CFN has a new look and a new theme

    "I bore you on eagle's wings, and brought you to Myself" (Exodus 19:4)

    More new themes will be coming in the future!

  • Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?

    Join For His Glory for a discussion on how

    https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/

  • CFN welcomes new contributing members!

    Please welcome Roberto and Julia to our family

    Blessings in Christ, and hope you stay awhile!

  • Have questions about the Christian faith?

    Come ask us what's on your mind in Questions and Answers

    https://christianforums.net/forums/questions-and-answers/

  • Read the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ?

    Read through this brief blog, and receive eternal salvation as the free gift of God

    /blog/the-gospel

  • Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need

    https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

The CURSE OF THE LAW

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mitspa
  • Start date Start date
Thank you Deb. This is exaclty what Paul is teaching!
That the written code excites the flesh, and gives it power over the spirit and soul of a believer.
No. The law can only make that demand on unbelievers, those still married to 'husband' flesh. "(T)he law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives." (Romans 7:1 NIV). But you are saying the law has authority to bind together sin and those who's sin nature has died in Christ.

The law is the legal authority that binds un-crucified, sinful flesh and unbeliever together like in a marriage, not those who have been set free from husband flesh through the death of husband flesh on the cross. 'Flesh' is dead. The law has no more authority to keep us bound to a husband who has died. Read the WHOLE passage in Romans. Don't just lift out a single verse or two. I challenge you to show me Paul is not saying this in ALL the verses of Romans 7. I posted ALL of what he's actually saying.



Its like having a broken arm, if one goes to sleep the pain of that broken bone is not felt, or is not a conscience emotion.
But the law comes and twist that broken arm, and makes that pain exceeding painful.

Thus we are told to "reckon" ourselves dead to the law and alive to God in Spirit.
Believers are the ones who are no longer married to, and therefore in submission to, sinful flesh anymore, because sinful flesh has died on the cross. You can NOT be held in a submissive relationship to someone who has died. That's the power, the truth, that we remember whenever 'flesh' deceives us into thinking he's still alive and in charge and able to dictate our submission to him, like in a marriage.

I challenge you to read Romans 7 carefully and thoughtfully and see that that is what Paul is teaching there. Only people who's flesh is still alive and un-crucified in Christ (aka, unbelievers) HAVE to be subject to the dictates of the law that bind it to the demands of 'husband' flesh.
 
I hate long posts, but since this is directly to you I'll be satisfied if only you read it all the way through.

Smile.. I did read it all the way through.

I agree that we need the Word, the Scriptures to guide us. I always pray for the Holy Spirit to open my eyes to the Truth of the Word, what God is really saying. I know I cannot trust my flesh. My flesh cannot understand the spiritual things of God without Him showing me.
We are to renew our fleshy minds by the Word of God.
And, faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.

I didn't think you were saying justified by the law, I just wanted to clarify that the law could not change the inner man, only the Holy Spirit can do that. I think we are on the same page. :)
:thumbsup

I think if anyone can get this, if they don't already, it's you. :clap
 
ok, gee I guess I better not read pauls epistles, chiefly galatians where he listed the fruits of the flesh.

might cause me to sin.

I love reading the Bible.

I guess I'm well on my way to becoming Chief of sinners. Move over Paul!
 
I realized that when I read the torah and studied it. I found that I was a very large sinner and needed to be redeemed. I realized despite how holy I thought I was. Iwasn't. so I have to pray and await the sanctification that I have asked the Lord for.

why I would call that.. what the torah is for.
 
Thank you Deb. This is exaclty what Paul is teaching!
That the written code excites the flesh, and gives it power over the spirit and soul of a believer.
No. The law can only make that demand on unbelievers, those still married to 'husband' flesh. "(T)he law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives." (Romans 7:1 NIV). But you are saying the law has authority to bind together sin and those who's sin nature has died in Christ.

The law is the legal authority that binds un-crucified, sinful flesh and unbeliever together like in a marriage, not those who have been set free from husband flesh through the death of husband flesh on the cross. 'Flesh' is dead. The law has no more authority to keep us bound to a husband who has died. Read the WHOLE passage in Romans. Don't just lift out a single verse or two. I challenge you to show me Paul is not saying this in ALL the verses of Romans 7. I posted ALL of what he's actually saying.



Its like having a broken arm, if one goes to sleep the pain of that broken bone is not felt, or is not a conscience emotion.
But the law comes and twist that broken arm, and makes that pain exceeding painful.

Thus we are told to "reckon" ourselves dead to the law and alive to God in Spirit.
Believers are the ones who are no longer married to, and therefore in submission to, sinful flesh anymore, because sinful flesh has died on the cross. You can NOT be held in a submissive relationship to someone who has died. That's the power, the truth, that we remember whenever 'flesh' deceives us into thinking he's still alive and in charge and able to dictate our submission to him, like in a marriage.

I challenge you to read Romans 7 carefully and thoughtfully and see that that is what Paul is teaching there. Only people who's flesh is still alive and un-crucified in Christ (aka, unbelievers) HAVE to be subject to the dictates of the law that bind it to the demands of 'husband' flesh.

In large part you are right, we have been set free, that why those who look to the written code of law are like those who commit adultry.
That is Pauls point.
 
ok, gee I guess I better not read pauls epistles, chiefly galatians where he listed the fruits of the flesh.

might cause me to sin.

I love reading the Bible.

I guess I'm well on my way to becoming Chief of sinners. Move over Paul!
Legalism kills no matter if you use the New Teatament or the Old.
2 Cor 3:6

Most of your doctrines are just the legalistic "spirit of bondage again unto fear" masked in New Testament scripture.
 
really?why then would I have a picture of my granddaughter as an avatar doing easter eggs when that is to some idolatry. or celebrate Christmas? I don't do shabat. I don't do kosher. I like pork and I eat a ton of it.

fear? hardly.i.im the least legalistic person I can be. I was raised in legalism I know what its like. I know its bondage. it doesn't get more legalistic then the kingdom Hall!

don't give blood
don't go to college
don't vote,
don't serve in the army, be a cop
don't celebrate. easter, Christmas, thanksgiving, valentines, birthdays. or say the pledge.
don't wear the cross cause its pagan or believe that jesus died on it.
that is legalism.
 
Thank you Deb. This is exaclty what Paul is teaching!
That the written code excites the flesh, and gives it power over the spirit and soul of a believer.
No. The law can only make that demand on unbelievers, those still married to 'husband' flesh. "(T)he law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives." (Romans 7:1 NIV). But you are saying the law has authority to bind together sin and those who's sin nature has died in Christ.

The law is the legal authority that binds un-crucified, sinful flesh and unbeliever together like in a marriage, not those who have been set free from husband flesh through the death of husband flesh on the cross. 'Flesh' is dead. The law has no more authority to keep us bound to a husband who has died. Read the WHOLE passage in Romans. Don't just lift out a single verse or two. I challenge you to show me Paul is not saying this in ALL the verses of Romans 7. I posted ALL of what he's actually saying.



Its like having a broken arm, if one goes to sleep the pain of that broken bone is not felt, or is not a conscience emotion.
But the law comes and twist that broken arm, and makes that pain exceeding painful.

Thus we are told to "reckon" ourselves dead to the law and alive to God in Spirit.
Believers are the ones who are no longer married to, and therefore in submission to, sinful flesh anymore, because sinful flesh has died on the cross. You can NOT be held in a submissive relationship to someone who has died. That's the power, the truth, that we remember whenever 'flesh' deceives us into thinking he's still alive and in charge and able to dictate our submission to him, like in a marriage.

I challenge you to read Romans 7 carefully and thoughtfully and see that that is what Paul is teaching there. Only people who's flesh is still alive and un-crucified in Christ (aka, unbelievers) HAVE to be subject to the dictates of the law that bind it to the demands of 'husband' flesh.

In large part you are right, we have been set free...
Now take the next step of understanding...old husband flesh demanded and got what he wanted from us because the law acted like a marital contract that gave him authority to do that. That's the 'law arousing sin in us' thing. But since husband 'flesh' has died the law can no longer enforce a marital obligation to someone who is no longer living. IOW, the law can't make us sin by keeping us in obligation to the flesh anymore, obeying the dictates and desires of a husband who is no longer alive.

The marital contract of the law no longer has the power and authority over us to enforce and demand we do what husband flesh desired when he was alive. That's why what Paul says about the law, that it gives power to the sin nature (husband flesh) to demand our submission, is only true for those still married to husband flesh who is still alive and well and not crucified dead in Christ yet.

The law being able to keep us in marital bondage to sin is only true for the person joined to husband sin nature who is still alive, not set free from husband sin nature who has died on the cross. Paul's point to believers is to resist any suggestion of the flesh that it still has the power, via the law, to demand our submission. Likewise, we are to resist any suggestion from any other source that tells us we are still married to husband flesh and, therefore, HAVE to obey it's sinful desires, the law acting as the legal force that demands that submission.

That is how we have died to the law. We died to it's authority to enforce a marital relationship that ended when husband flesh perished on the cross with Jesus.

(I love this stuff!)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
why I would call that.. what the torah is for


When I read a couple of months ago All the 613 laws, I was amazed at the love God had for these people of the OT. He showed them everything, how to grow their crops, how to care for each other, how to be healthy, on and on. He wanted them to know how to live as the children of the Most High God. He wanted them to trust Him with their everyday lives and bless them.
Now when I read the OT I see Jesus the Messiah over and over and God's grace and mercy. What a disobedient lot they were in general as a people but He kept on loving them.

What I am saying below does not pertain to you in anyway that I know of. It's kind of statement about your other post about the churches teaching too much....

The problem with reading or being fed a consist diet of the OT and the Torah in particular is that many Christians really don't know how much God loves them. I don't think anyone can know the fullest extent of His love. If one isn't secure in God's grace and mercy the law of the Torah can be a place of bondage (Hagar) because that's all they can see, which leads to obeying the law for justification for salvation or just too much self awareness instead of Holy Spirit awareness, there by stifling the direction the Lord wants to lead. We are not here to be an island onto ourselves but to be disciples for Christ.
I truly believe that if we are taught the Gospel of Grace, that we have been made the righteousness of God, in Christ, God's enormous love for us, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit will lead us, at people will willingly turn their lives around to serve God as He calls us to do. It is the love of God that brings one to repentance.
I am not talking about a wishy washy gospel of blue skies smiling at me.
For a grace pastor to be accused of too much grace is a good thing, he is doing his job. But he also needs to make it clear that grace is not a license to sin because there are those who will take advantage of the Father's kindness. They need to know that if they do this they may be in for some severe chastisement from the Lord and from the Church.

If we want our children to respect and love us, we need to show them love first just as God does us. Children respond to what is given to them by their parents. God knows this and this is how He loves us.
 
really?why then would I have a picture of my granddaughter as an avatar doing easter eggs when that is to some idolatry. or celebrate Christmas? I don't do shabat. I don't do kosher. I like pork and I eat a ton of it.

Because you know the real Jesus and what His grace means. :)

There's nothing like living under legalism to teach someone that they don't want it anymore and they understand grace.
 
The marital contract of the law no loner has the power and authority over us to enforce and push us into doing what flesh demanded when he was alive. That's why what Paul says about the law, that it gives power to the sin nature (husband flesh) to demand our submission, is only true for those still married to husband flesh and who is alive and well and not crucified dead in Christ yet


I understand this and agree, I like your analogy.
 
No. The law can only make that demand on unbelievers, those still married to 'husband' flesh. "(T)he law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives." (Romans 7:1 NIV). But you are saying the law has authority to bind together sin and those who's sin nature has died in Christ.

The law is the legal authority that binds un-crucified, sinful flesh and unbeliever together like in a marriage, not those who have been set free from husband flesh through the death of husband flesh on the cross. 'Flesh' is dead. The law has no more authority to keep us bound to a husband who has died. Read the WHOLE passage in Romans. Don't just lift out a single verse or two. I challenge you to show me Paul is not saying this in ALL the verses of Romans 7. I posted ALL of what he's actually saying.




Believers are the ones who are no longer married to, and therefore in submission to, sinful flesh anymore, because sinful flesh has died on the cross. You can NOT be held in a submissive relationship to someone who has died. That's the power, the truth, that we remember whenever 'flesh' deceives us into thinking he's still alive and in charge and able to dictate our submission to him, like in a marriage.

I challenge you to read Romans 7 carefully and thoughtfully and see that that is what Paul is teaching there. Only people who's flesh is still alive and un-crucified in Christ (aka, unbelievers) HAVE to be subject to the dictates of the law that bind it to the demands of 'husband' flesh.

In large part you are right, we have been set free...
Now take the next step of understanding...old husband flesh demanded and got what he wanted from us because the law acted like a marital contract that gave him authority to do that. That's the 'law arousing sin in us' thing. But since husband 'flesh' has died the law can no longer enforce a marital obligation to someone who is no longer living. IOW, the law can't make us sin by keeping us in obligation to the flesh anymore, obeying the dictates and desires of a husband who is no longer alive.

The marital contract of the law no longer has the power and authority over us to enforce and demand we do what husband flesh desired when he was alive. That's why what Paul says about the law, that it gives power to the sin nature (husband flesh) to demand our submission, is only true for those still married to husband flesh who is still alive and well and not crucified dead in Christ yet.

The law being able to keep us in marital bondage to sin is only true for the person joined to husband sin nature who is still alive, not set free from husband sin nature who has died on the cross. Paul's point to believers is to resist any suggestion of the flesh that it still has the power, via the law, to demand our submission. Likewise, we are to resist any suggestion from any other source that tells us we are still married to husband flesh and, therefore, HAVE to obey it's sinful desires, the law acting as the legal force that demands that submission.

That is how we have died to the law. We died to it's authority to enforce a marital relationship that ended when husband flesh perished on the cross with Jesus.

(I love this stuff!)

Yes when one has died to the law, they are free from sin.
Therefore we no longer look to the OLD written code, but we look to Christ.
 
Gal 3:10-13
For as many as are under the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written "CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT CONTINUE IN ALL THINGS WHICH ARE WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW, TO DO THEM"

This is the main subject of the book of Galatians. That those who had been freely justified by the grace of God, and given the free gift of righteousness. Had now turned back into the written code, and to attempts to justify themselves by parts of the law.
Pauls point was that if you try to keep any part of the written code, you are subject to keep it all. And in this effort to earn, what God only gives by faith, a man has turned from the blessing of Abraham unto the curse of the law.
Take notice that it is ALL THAT IS WRITTEN- EVERY JOT AND TITTLE!
So this is Pauls point from the begining of this epistle. If any man preach another gospel other than His Gospel, they are ANATHEMA
Those who teach the law and legalism are in fact "anathema" They are the "cursed" children of 2 Pet 2:14
2 Cor 3:12-15 Seeing we have such hope, we use great boldness of speech. And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not behold the end of that which is ABOLISHED.
But their MINDS WERE BLINDED, for even until this day the same vail remains at the reading of the OLD testament. WHICH IS DONE AWAY IN CHRIST.
but even unto this day, when Moses is read the vail is upon their heart.

Deu 28:28-29 THE LORD SHALL SMITE THEE WITH MADNESS, AND BLINDNESS AND ASTONISHMENT OF HEART: AND THOU SHALT GROPE IN THE NOONDAY, AS THE BLIND GROPETH IN DARKNESS.

We see that those who cannot see that Christ is the end of the law, for righteousness. Are indeed cursed, and blind of mind and heart. Altough many claim to be children of the Day, they have no understanding of Gods righteousness and go about to establish their own righteousness, by the written code of the law.
 
My friend I see you use the term law (1) and (2) This is unbiblical!
What according to you does the term 'LAW' denote - give a single biblical definition, if you please. And then tell me if that single definition is equally applicable to all the following instances of the term -

1) "Law of Moses, Prophets and Psalms"(Luke 24:44) - does this refer specifically to just the commandments, judgements and ordinances, or does this refer to a section of OT scripture just as other OT sections may be referred to as "the Prophets" or "the Psalms"?

2) "keeping the law"(John 7:19) - does this refer to an entire section of OT scripture or does this specifically refer to the set of commandments, judgements and ordinances?

3) "law of faith"(Rom 3:27) - does this refer to an entire section of OT scripture or does it refer to a set of commandments, judgements and ordinances or does it refer to a rule of principle much like the 'law of gravity' - the replacement of a similar 'law of works' found in Lev 18:5, by the 'law of faith' found in John 3:15?

In each of the above instances, is the term LAW referring to exactly the same thing? If not, why am I accused of being unbiblical when I'm merely distinguishing between the various usage references?
 
My friend I see you use the term law (1) and (2) This is unbiblical!
What according to you does the term 'LAW' denote - give a single biblical definition, if you please. And then tell me if that single definition is equally applicable to all the following instances of the term -

1) "Law of Moses, Prophets and Psalms"(Luke 24:44) - does this refer specifically to just the commandments, judgements and ordinances, or does this refer to a section of OT scripture just as other OT sections may be referred to as "the Prophets" or "the Psalms"?

2) "keeping the law"(John 7:19) - does this refer to an entire section of OT scripture or does this specifically refer to the set of commandments, judgements and ordinances?

3) "law of faith"(Rom 3:27) - does this refer to an entire section of OT scripture or does it refer to a set of commandments, judgements and ordinances or does it refer to a rule of principle much like the 'law of gravity' - the replacement of a similar 'law of works' found in Lev 18:5, by the 'law of faith' found in John 3:15?

In each of the above instances, is the term LAW referring to exactly the same thing? If not, why am I accused of being unbiblical when I'm merely distinguishing between the various usage references?

Well first the law is not "the law of faith" the scripture declares that the law is not of faith. Gal 3:12
Now we see the faith of those who had faith in the Old testament. Paul uses this term in Rom 3:27-28 to describe the righteousness of faith that justifies apart from the deeds of the law.
And Jesus describes the law as evey jot and tittle, Paul as ALL THAT IS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW.

so as Paul uses the example in 2 Cor 3:14 it is all the Old Testament is considered to be the law.
Or one could say the law and the prophets.
And your use of John 3:15 is a bit of a mystery to me, in that I see no point that you have made.
 
1. all the Old Testament is considered to be the law.
2. scripture declares that the law is not of faith.
3. Now we see the faith of those who had faith in the Old testament.
If I am to follow your definition for LAW as "all the OT" from your statement1, and apply it to your statement2, then we have Scripture declaring that "all the OT" is not of faith - which seems to be in contradiction with your statement3. Would you like to clarify or redefine?

You'd keep running into similar issues if you rigidly hold the LAW to mean only "all the OT"(which it also means) - but look at the same Gal 3:12 that you referred to. When saying that the law is not of faith, Paul also goes on to quote what he referred to as the LAW - which is not "all the OT" but a very specific Lev 18:5.

And your use of John 3:15 is a bit of a mystery to me, in that I see no point that you have made.
And in that I see you've still misunderstood everything I've posited so far. This is not a complaint at all - but rather a very hopeful reason for me to continue the discussion. I'd have been disappointed if you'd completely understood what I was saying and then rejected it. The possibility that I could still explain further and that you could understand and accept it, is a good enough reason to continue.

Consider the 2 variants of the Oxford definition for the word LAW:
1. the whole system of rules that everyone in a country or society must obey. Eg: In Sweden it is against the law to hit a child.
2. the fact that something always happens in the same way in an activity or in nature. Eg: law of gravity.

Consider the second definition above. A non-scientific version of the eg. "law of gravity" would be -
IF an object is dropped - THEN it will fall to the ground.

The term LAW here refers to a principle - that IF a particular thing happens, THEN its subsequent result/effect happens.

The same principle is captured in the term LAW as in Gal 3:12, which is a direct quote of Lev 18:5 which can be similarly phrased -
IF man does the statutes and judgements - THEN he shall live (having done them).

Just like the "law of gravity", this principle is called the "law of works" since it deals with what man DOES.

Similarly, John 3:15 can be rephrased as -
IF man believes in Jesus Christ - THEN he shall live (having received the grace of God).

This principle is called the "law of faith" since it deals with man's faith.

This usage of the term LAW has nothing to do with its other usage as a whole system of rules. While the principle-LAW of works is now removed and nailed to the cross, the whole system of rules-LAW is still valid in its spiritual connotation.

What do you find unscriptural in this explanation?
 
Well what they need is to be taken and taught Gods grace. Those who teach law and grace together are the problem in the chruch. Because when you mix law and grace you defeat the power of both. The strength of sin is the law. The power over sin is grace. Rom 6:14 For sin will not have dominion over you, because you are not under law but under grace.


the problem is that where is a wrong faith there can hardly be grace of the true God, just see how the Lord Jesus Christ many times said: "woe unto you, scribes and pharisees"(Matthew 23) i.e. He strongly warned the theologians and the clerics of the human religion, but why He did never say: "woe unto you, gentiles", nor: "woe unto you, publicans", neither: "woe unto you, harlots"?!, but He even said to the clerics of the "earth": "Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you."(Matthew 21:31), and also: "If ye were blind(i.e. if you were poor in spirit), ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see(i.e. we are spiritually competent); therefore your sin remaineth."(John 8:41), because exactly the spiritual/religious iniquity is the very sin

Blessings
 
1. all the Old Testament is considered to be the law.
2. scripture declares that the law is not of faith.
3. Now we see the faith of those who had faith in the Old testament.
If I am to follow your definition for LAW as "all the OT" from your statement1, and apply it to your statement2, then we have Scripture declaring that "all the OT" is not of faith - which seems to be in contradiction with your statement3. Would you like to clarify or redefine?

You'd keep running into similar issues if you rigidly hold the LAW to mean only "all the OT"(which it also means) - but look at the same Gal 3:12 that you referred to. When saying that the law is not of faith, Paul also goes on to quote what he referred to as the LAW - which is not "all the OT" but a very specific Lev 18:5.

And your use of John 3:15 is a bit of a mystery to me, in that I see no point that you have made.
And in that I see you've still misunderstood everything I've posited so far. This is not a complaint at all - but rather a very hopeful reason for me to continue the discussion. I'd have been disappointed if you'd completely understood what I was saying and then rejected it. The possibility that I could still explain further and that you could understand and accept it, is a good enough reason to continue.

Consider the 2 variants of the Oxford definition for the word LAW:
1. the whole system of rules that everyone in a country or society must obey. Eg: In Sweden it is against the law to hit a child.
2. the fact that something always happens in the same way in an activity or in nature. Eg: law of gravity.

Consider the second definition above. A non-scientific version of the eg. "law of gravity" would be -
IF an object is dropped - THEN it will fall to the ground.

The term LAW here refers to a principle - that IF a particular thing happens, THEN its subsequent result/effect happens.

The same principle is captured in the term LAW as in Gal 3:12, which is a direct quote of Lev 18:5 which can be similarly phrased -
IF man does the statutes and judgements - THEN he shall live (having done them).

Just like the "law of gravity", this principle is called the "law of works" since it deals with what man DOES.

Similarly, John 3:15 can be rephrased as -
IF man believes in Jesus Christ - THEN he shall live (having received the grace of God).

This principle is called the "law of faith" since it deals with man's faith.

This usage of the term LAW has nothing to do with its other usage as a whole system of rules. While the principle-LAW of works is now removed and nailed to the cross, the whole system of rules-LAW is still valid in its spiritual connotation.

What do you find unscriptural in this explanation?

well I have no issue with how the term "law" is defined in your post. But it has little to do with the honest reading of the post I have made in regard to the "law of moses" or "written code" The scriptures themselves assume one to honest enough to take these scriptures in their context and understand with an honest heart their intended meaning.

So a debate about words can sometimes to helpful, but very often it is a tactic to confuse the issue or point.

Now I not sure if you are seeking truth or just looking for an occasion to debate small issue, until the truth is hidden behind endless debate. I have made very clear statements and used clear biblical terms in their proper context. Now I am not sure of what point you are trying to make? Speak in clear terms where you find fault or agreement with my clear and evident post. And I will be glad to respond and seek the truth with you.
 
Consider the 2 variants of the Oxford definition for the word LAW:
1. the whole system of rules that everyone in a country or society must obey. Eg: In Sweden it is against the law to hit a child.
2. the fact that something always happens in the same way in an activity or in nature. Eg: law of gravity.

Consider the second definition above. A non-scientific version of the eg. "law of gravity" would be -
IF an object is dropped - THEN it will fall to the ground.

The term LAW here refers to a principle - that IF a particular thing happens, THEN its subsequent result/effect happens.

The same principle is captured in the term LAW as in Gal 3:12, which is a direct quote of Lev 18:5 which can be similarly phrased -
IF man does the statutes and judgements - THEN he shall live (having done them).

Just like the "law of gravity", this principle is called the "law of works" since it deals with what man DOES.

Similarly, John 3:15 can be rephrased as -
IF man believes in Jesus Christ - THEN he shall live (having received the grace of God).

This principle is called the "law of faith" since it deals with man's faith.

This usage of the term LAW has nothing to do with its other usage as a whole system of rules. While the principle-LAW of works is now removed and nailed to the cross, the whole system of rules-LAW is still valid in its spiritual connotation.
I don't have any problem with your explanation of 'law of faith'. I can accept it as a legitimate explanation of what Paul is trying to get across. But I get a more complete idea of what he means from Galatians 6...

"15 For neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. 16 And those who will walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them" (Galatians 6:15-16 NASB)

He's saying, "You who like rules, 'be a new creation'." Walk in that commanded rule and peace and mercy will be yours, and then you will be doing what is right and expected of you and doing what really matters.

I think you're on the right track when you talk of 'law' implying 'doing'. So, speaking in the language of law the Galatians understand all too well, he says instead of following laws of circumcisions, and holy days, etc. to try and please God and be justified (see context), follow the 'rule' to have faith in Christ and walk in the new nature that results. 'Be a new creation', then you will be doing what God expects of you and which pleases Him, and doing what really counts toward the faith that justifies.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Now I not sure if you are seeking truth or just looking for an occasion to debate small issue, until the truth is hidden behind endless debate. I have made very clear statements and used clear biblical terms in their proper context. Now I am not sure of what point you are trying to make? Speak in clear terms where you find fault or agreement with my clear and evident post. And I will be glad to respond and seek the truth with you.
I think as long as we all understand and agree that the prohibition of law, which brings the curse, is trying to be justified by the law, not simply seeking to fulfill the requirements of the law ('love your neighbor as yourself', 'do not steal', 'do not covet', etc.) through our faith in Christ as seen in the walking in the fruit of the Spirit, there really is no real disagreement here. But ivdavid can clarify his POV on that.
 
Back
Top