The Law of God. OT. Applicable Today?

[Edward]

yep. it's pretty rough now, I can only imagine how much worse it is going to get. As long as we keep the faith, we will be able to overcome and be ok.

 

[childeye]

yep. it's pretty rough now, I can only imagine how much worse it is going to get. As long as we keep the faith, we will be able to overcome and be ok.

I read things like, "if this is what you do with the foot soldiers, what are you going to do about the chariots". I would like to think I would stand as stiff necked in Love as I was stiff necked in sin, but then again I might just weep like a baby. Self doubt was Adams problem. But even Jesus sweated blood.

 

[JLB]

It is an interesting parable. I can't say I have any problem with what you say here. I take away from what you say that, the oil is the Truth and the Light which burns the oil are the actions that we produce through putting the oil to use. That sounds quite viable. But this does not really answer how it is wisdom to bring extra oil. The foolish virgins had oil also but not enough to maintain their lamps. Perhaps the oil is Love.

I think everyone pretty much agrees that the oil represents the Holy Spirit.

The Spirit of Truth.
The Spirit of Life.
The Spirit of Love.

 

[JLB]

I believe it. i see it everyday.
Stay in the Spirit stay in the Spirit stay in the Spirit. (I'm talking to myself there)

Keeping yourself built up on your most holy faith...pray in the spirit.

But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Spirit, 21 keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life. Jude 20-21

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I would like to think I would stand as stiff necked in Love as I was stiff necked in sin...

Thus the meaning of my avatar.

I want to be as hardened and determined and unmoved in the pursuit of righteousness and the things of God as Anton Chigurh was in the pursuit of his agenda.

Oh, and not to mention the humor factor involved in my choice of avatar too, lol.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I take away from what you say that, the oil is the Truth and the Light which burns the oil are the actions that we produce through putting the oil to use. That sounds quite viable. But this does not really answer how it is wisdom to bring extra oil. The foolish virgins had oil also but not enough to maintain their lamps. Perhaps the oil is Love.

What's foolish is to think that just because you are an oil lamp means you have the second coming of Christ all sealed up.

We see this theme of preparedness all over Jesus' teachings. I had to retrain my thinking and change my personal doctrine away from what I had been taught and realign it with what was actually taught at great length in the Bible. It's simply not enough to be an oil lamp (that is, say you are a Christian). The lamp has to have oil in it and be burning in the night.

This dovetails with this discussion about the law because as Edward pointed out not being under the law does not mean we do not have to satisfy the requirements of the law, that somehow simply being a Christian is what saves. We satisfy the law in all the ways that faith in Christ does in this New Covenant. Which is actually where the real contention about the law comes in for the church--that is, "how does faith satisfy the law in this New Covenant?".

 

[Jethro Bodine]

The Holy Spirit leads us into truth, being truth and illuminates to guide our path in our walk. Which we walk out into righteousness being led by Him and His light.

This is why I say that the Holy Spirit is the embodiment of truth. So it is in that sense that the oil is truth.

Disobedience to the Spirit...sin. And we were the ones victimized! There's a fruit of the Spirit, love, obedience. but wait, the law says thou shalt not steal. But we're not under the Law, we're being led of the Spirit!

This is why it's so important to know what Paul means by 'not being under the law'.

It doesn't mean the law ceases to be a standard of righteous living for the people of God (James uses it extensively to teach the church about how to act righteously). It means, among other things, that we are no longer led by mere written words which have no power to change a person, but by the very Spirit of God inhabiting those and other words, impressing them on our hearts just as the Prophets said would happen. Words fulfilled--not abolished--in all the new ways of the Spirit that now happens in this New Covenant, which may, or may not, differ from how they got fulfilled in the old covenant.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

What ended was...

The law as a covenant of worship, cleanliness, and separation. The law ceased to be the covenant by which people draw near to God (he replaced that covenant with a new and better one...but one that stills satisfies the law).

and...

The misunderstanding that the law was the way God provided to justify yourself before God.

and...

As long as you stay forgiven under the blood of Christ, the condemnation of the law has ended. That written debt of condemnation of law got nailed to the cross with Jesus, hallelujah! Stay in Christ through a continuing faith in the forgiveness of sins his body and blood provides and that's exactly where that condemnation will stay--nailed to the cross and marked 'Satisfied--paid in full. Check # CALVARY'.

 

[Edward]

This is why I say that the Holy Spirit is the embodiment of truth. So it is in that sense that the oil is truth.



This is why it's so important to know what Paul means by 'not being under the law'.

It doesn't mean the law ceases to be a standard of righteous living for the people of God (James uses it extensively to teach the church about how to act righteously). It means, among other things, that we are no longer led by mere written words which have no power to change a person, but by the very Spirit of God inhabiting those and other words, impressing them on our hearts just as the Prophets said would happen. Words fulfilled--not abolished--in all the new ways of the Spirit that now happens in this New Covenant, which may, or may not, differ from how they got fulfilled in the old covenant.

That's pretty much my line of reasoning when I said that the oil is truth.

Well said! Being led of the Spirit is having the renewed mind (loosely speaking). The closer to god that we become, the more of His Word that we have written upon our heart...the more we achieve and possess having the mind of Christ so in being in Him and He in us, the Spirit leads us, we think He does, then, (in a practical manner of speaking) there is no law to us for Gods will is being done. The law is still there but is not what we are subject to because we are subject to the Spirit. The Spirit will naturally not transgress the law so it's not as if we're allowed to sin, we just wont. The Spirit wont.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

...the Spirit leads us, we think He does, then, (in a practical manner of speaking) there is no law to us for Gods will is being done. The law is still there but is not what we are subject to because we are subject to the Spirit. The Spirit will naturally not transgress the law so it's not as if we're allowed to sin, we just wont. The Spirit wont.

I believe that's what Paul meant when he said this:

"22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law." (Galatians 5:22-23 NASB emphasis mine)

There is no violation of law when we walk in the Spirit. Law can not condemn the person who walks in the Spirit. He said the same thing here:

"4... so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit." (Romans 8:4 NASB)

As a Christian, one must walk in the Spirit to not be under the condemnation of the law.

 

[childeye]

What's foolish is to think that just because you are an oil lamp means you have the second coming of Christ all sealed up.

There is no actual salvation until the redemption is what I take you as saying. The determinist would argue that only the wise virgins were ever the true believers.

We see this theme of preparedness all over Jesus' teachings. I had to retrain my thinking and change my personal doctrine away from what I had been taught and realign it with what was actually taught at great length in the Bible. It's simply not enough to be an oil lamp (that is, say you are a Christian). The lamp has to have oil in it and be burning in the night.

There is deception. Everyone thinks they are in Christ yet don't always agree on what that means. I write on an atheist forum where it is claimed that roughly 80% of them were former believers. I contend that none of them were ever believers and then I show them why using the very words they use. I point out things like how they use the term believer to describe a Christian. I tell them it is a secular terminology. It essentially means to believe in something without evidence. Likewise they use the word faith with the same connotation. The inference is actually belief in a superstition. I then show them that when a Christian uses the terms believe or faith, the inference is trust in Love. Christians trust in Love as the Spirit Eternal. Hence when I believe in the Christ it is tantamount to saying, I would trust this man who suffers crucifixion yet forgives his assailants saying they simply do not know what they do. It is not belief in something that cannot be seen, for Love is seen as the highest value in all of humanity. I point out that the True Christian worships because the worship is drawn out of them by the object of worship, not because it is a duty. I then try to discreetly reveal that what 80% of them were doing was practicing religion and their worship was simply patronizing their sense of superstition.

This dovetails with this discussion about the law because as Edward pointed out not being under the law does not mean we do not have to satisfy the requirements of the law, that somehow simply being a Christian is what saves. We satisfy the law in all the ways that faith in Christ does in this New Covenant. Which is actually where the real contention about the law comes in for the church--that is, "how does faith satisfy the law in this New Covenant?".

The law requires the sacrifice of animal lives for the cleansing of sin, and also that this must happen in Jerusalem. Hence the law or Old Testament is over. It's requirements were fulfilled by the sacrifice of the Lamb of God. We are now under grace and not under the law.

I would claim faith transcends the law, for the law was not built on faith but on doubt. We as Christians sacrifice ourselves counting ourselves sheep for the slaughter. Every time we forgive someone who sins against us, particularly when they are not even sorry, we are sacrificing ourselves. Every time we share, we sacrifice, and one act of Love covers a multitude of sins. The children of God return good for evil and mercy is greater than justice.

But fulfilling the works of the law will never justify us, because the true sin wherein the law was necessary in the first place, was that we take God for granted and count His given attributes as our own in prideful vanity. It is therefore, why we cannot fulfill the law that matters in the New Testament, not how we fulfill it. What is the intent of the heart? To save ourselves or to lift up the Holy image of God? That is where faith in God and not ourselves comes in. The man who has faith, obeys God because he trusts God and God's Holy Character is intact. The man who is obedient out of duty is self righteous and regards his obedience as the measure of his goodness. So when God says you are all sinners and none of you good, then the man of faith trusts God and hopes in mercy. While the man who try's to prove he is good through the works of the law is trying to prove God is a liar.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Good points for discussion.

I'll be back.

 

[Deborah13]

There is no actual salvation until the redemption is what I take you as saying. The determinist would argue that only the wise virgins were ever the true believers.


There is deception. Everyone thinks they are in Christ yet don't always agree on what that means. I write on an atheist forum where it is claimed that roughly 80% of them were former believers. I contend that none of them were ever believers and then I show them why using the very words they use. I point out things like how they use the term believer to describe a Christian. I tell them it is a secular terminology. It essentially means to believe in something without evidence. Likewise they use the word faith with the same connotation. The inference is actually belief in a superstition. I then show them that when a Christian uses the terms believe or faith, the inference is trust in Love. Christians trust in Love as the Spirit Eternal. Hence when I believe in the Christ it is tantamount to saying, I would trust this man who suffers crucifixion yet forgives his assailants saying they simply do not know what they do. It is not belief in something that cannot be seen, for Love is seen as the highest value in all of humanity. I point out that the True Christian worships because the worship is drawn out of them by the object of worship, not because it is a duty. I then try to discreetly reveal that what 80% of them were doing was practicing religion and their worship was simply patronizing their sense of superstition.


The law requires the sacrifice of animal lives for the cleansing of sin, and also that this must happen in Jerusalem. Hence the law or Old Testament is over. It's requirements were fulfilled by the sacrifice of the Lamb of God. We are now under grace and not under the law.

I would claim faith transcends the law, for the law was not built on faith but on doubt. We as Christians sacrifice ourselves counting ourselves sheep for the slaughter. Every time we forgive someone who sins against us, particularly when they are not even sorry, we are sacrificing ourselves. Every time we share, we sacrifice, and one act of Love covers a multitude of sins. The children of God return good for evil and mercy is greater than justice.

But fulfilling the works of the law will never justify us, because the true sin wherein the law was necessary in the first place, was that we take God for granted and count His given attributes as our own in prideful vanity. It is therefore, why we cannot fulfill the law that matters in the New Testament, not how we fulfill it. What is the intent of the heart? To save ourselves or to lift up the Holy image of God? That is where faith in God and not ourselves comes in. The man who has faith, obeys God because he trusts God and God's Holy Character is intact. The man who is obedient out of duty is self righteous and regards his obedience as the measure of his goodness. So when God says you are all sinners and none of you good, then the man of faith trusts God and hopes in mercy. While the man who try's to prove he is good through the works of the law is trying to prove God is a liar.

:amen

 

[JLB]

What ended was...

The law as a covenant of worship, cleanliness, and separation. The law ceased to be the covenant by which people draw near to God (he replaced that covenant with a new and better one...but one that stills satisfies the law).

and...

The misunderstanding that the law was the way God provided to justify yourself before God.

and...

As long as you stay forgiven under the blood of Christ, the condemnation of the law has ended. That written debt of condemnation of law got nailed to the cross with Jesus, hallelujah! Stay in Christ through a continuing faith in the forgiveness of sins his body and blood provides and that's exactly where that condemnation will stay--nailed to the cross and marked 'Satisfied--paid in full. Check # CALVARY'.

The New Covenant is not a different Covenant , but the Covenant that God made with Abraham with a "freshness" that it did not have.

The refreshened covenant not different covenant.

The Law of Moses was added to this covenant until Christ.

Now we as Gentiles are a full part of this Covenant that was originally intended for Abrahams children.

Now in this covenant we have the Holy Spirit and a new nature as Children of God.

Abraham walked with God and was taught by God, His law and precepts and commandments which Abraham was obedient to obey.... 430 years before the Law was added.


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

There is no actual salvation until the redemption is what I take you as saying.

Yes, and no. We have the very sure hope of salvation as long as we keep believing.

The determinist would argue that only the wise virgins were ever the true believers.

And I would have agreed with that in the past. But then I saw what the Bible actually teaches.

You're beginning to touch on why it's important that we not misunderstand Paul's grace/law teaching as a teaching that says 'not being under the law anymore' means we don't have to somehow fulfill the law by our faith in Christ.

There is deception. Everyone thinks they are in Christ yet don't always agree on what that means. I write on an atheist forum where it is claimed that roughly 80% of them were former believers. I contend that none of them were ever believers and then I show them why using the very words they use.

I know a person who got saved, talked in tongues, but who later fell from the faith. What I observed right from the beginning was not the absence of saving faith, but a faith that was weak right from the start and could not endure to the end as the Bible exhorts must happen in order to be saved in the end. Failed faith is not 'no faith at all' as is popularly taught. A failed faith is a weak faith. One that could not endure to the end.

The danger is thinking that we are 'no longer under the law' means that salvation is so utterly not of works, so this person was either never saved to begin with, or, is still saved despite their disobedience. Neither has to be true. Biblically, it is also possible that they simply stopped believing in Christ. You may not see the connection between the argument that they were never saved to begin with, or they are still saved no matter what, with the present day misunderstanding of Paul's grace/law teaching, but it is there.

The law requires the sacrifice of animal lives for the cleansing of sin, and also that this must happen in Jerusalem. Hence the law or Old Testament is over. It's requirements were fulfilled by the sacrifice of the Lamb of God. We are now under grace and not under the law.

What you are speaking about here is the end of the first covenant, not what the first covenant sought to do. What it sought to do remains to this day and is fulfilled in the New way, the New Covenant of Christ the new High Priest and his priestly ministry in the Temple of God's people.

I would claim faith transcends the law, for the law was not built on faith but on doubt.

But Paul argues that it is the Israelites who mistakenly made the way of law a way of works contrary to the way of faith. IOW, the law is not of faith when one makes it that way by thinking that one is justified by works of the law.

So when God says you are all sinners and none of you good, then the man of faith trusts God and hopes in mercy. While the man who try's to prove he is good through the works of the law is trying to prove God is a liar.

While true, I don't see this as problematic in the church today. The problem I see today is the people of God thinking that the 'end of the law' means they don't have to be obedient to be saved on the Day of Wrath because salvation is so utterly not of works and is a free gift. It's true that we don't have to be obedient to be justified. Right standing with God truly is a free gift of God given apart from the performance of righteous work. But we most certainly do have to have righteous works of faith on the Day of Wrath to show for our faith in God's forgiveness that we said we had in this life time. Lip service alone will save no one. As James says, faith without works is a faith that can not save. Faith without works can no more save a man as 'hope you are warm and well fed' by itself can clothe and care for the brother/sister in need. But so many think that 'not being under the law' means faith alone saves. That is the distortion that has led to some very wrong doctrines about faith, works, and salvation in the church today.

 

[childeye]

And I would have agreed with that in the past. But then I saw what the Bible actually teaches.

You're beginning to touch on why it's important that we not misunderstand Paul's grace/law teaching as a teaching that says 'not being under the law anymore' means we don't have to somehow fulfill the law by our faith in Christ.

I understand the argument and your concern. I've watched this debate play out many times on this forum in many different threads. It is closely related to the freewill vs. determinism debate, the works vs. faith debate. These debates are for the most part arguing semantics.

First and foremost, the law is for sinners and addresses unrighteousness. Only the thief who gets joy from getting away with something unearned needs to be told not to steal. To address your concern that people must still fulfill the law despite believing in Jesus carries more than one perspective. What first comes to mind for myself, is the inference that just because you say you believe in Jesus doesn't mean you can go commit murder, steal, have adulterous affairs etc...

However, there is also the counter point to be made that the law is obsolete, for if one who truly believes in the Christ, one cannot or will not do those things anyway. But then if that is so, why is Paul saying not to yield our members if in fact we can't sin? The semantics of this debate are inevitable because of course there are degrees wherein a person must change from the carnal mind to the mind of Christ, so as to say the sinful nature does not simply disappear upon confessing Christ. This makes both perspectives true in some manner.

Moreover there are semantics in the term "works". There are works of faith that are different than works of the law. I think it is best to understand that the works of the law are for sinners and the law is a base requirement. The person giving his hard earned money to those less fortunate does not need to be told not to steal.

I know a person who got saved, talked in tongues, but who later fell from the faith. What I observed right from the beginning was not the absence of saving faith, but a faith that was weak right from the start and could not endure to the end as the Bible exhorts must happen in order to be saved in the end. Failed faith is not 'no faith at all' as is popularly taught. A failed faith is a weak faith. One that could not endure to the end.

I am sorry, but I have a hard time believing this person fell. First understand that one must have some place to fall from. I recall the parable of the sower when I read this. My question to you would be, what exactly was their faith placed in? To answer their faith was in Christ is not acceptable. What did that mean to him/her to believe in the Christ?

The danger is thinking that we are 'no longer under the law' means that salvation is so utterly not of works, so this person was either never saved to begin with, or, is still saved despite their disobedience. Neither has to be true. Biblically, it is also possible that they simply stopped believing in Christ. You may not see the connection between the argument that they were never saved to begin with, or they are still saved no matter what, with the present day misunderstanding of Paul's grace/law teaching, but it is there.

I certainly am going to try to understand your sincere sentiments. Having said that, I do believe I perceive what you are saying. The truth is that the way we say things is not always the same. Salvation is a loose term in the abstract and uncompromising in the definitive.

But Paul argues that it is the Israelites who mistakenly made the way of law a way of works contrary to the way of faith. IOW, the law is not of faith when one makes it that way by thinking that one is justified by works of the law.

That is an interesting take. It certainly makes a good point. But that may be using the word faith in an abstract form. Suppose I said that the law was not of faith, because God knew men were wicked? He had no faith we could keep it.

The problem I see today is the people of God thinking that the 'end of the law' means they don't have to be obedient to be saved on the Day of Wrath because salvation is so utterly not of works and is a free gift. It's true that we don't have to be obedient to be justified. Right standing with God truly is a free gift of God given apart from the performance of righteous work. But we most certainly do have to have righteous works of faith on the Day of Wrath to show for our faith in God's forgiveness that we said we had in this life time. Lip service alone will save no one. As James says, faith without works is a faith that can not save. Faith without works can no more save a man as 'hope you are warm and well fed' by itself can clothe and care for the brother/sister in need. But so many think that 'not being under the law' means faith alone saves. That is the distortion that has led to some very wrong doctrines about faith, works, and salvation in the church today.

To me, all you are saying is there are semantics in words, and scripture can be misunderstood. How true.

 

[childeye]

It would seem prudent to mankind that God first would have given us the Spirit to keep the law before giving the law. In this case however it should be acknowledged that there was corruption in mankind due to the incident in the garden.

 

[phil marriner]

Many will try to take others back into law by throwing scriptures around. THis was the case in the 1st century.There is no law in perfect love. The old was destroyed in 70ad with the destruction of Jerusalem, the temple and the OT forever. If someone wants to live by the law, then they will be judged by the law.But as we well know NO ONE is able to keep the law except Chris twho kept the law perfectly to fulfill it and make it obsolete

 

[JLB]

What ended was...

The law as a covenant of worship, cleanliness, and separation. The law ceased to be the covenant by which people draw near to God (he replaced that covenant with a new and better one...but one that stills satisfies the law).

and...

The misunderstanding that the law was the way God provided to justify yourself before God.

and...

As long as you stay forgiven under the blood of Christ, the condemnation of the law has ended. That written debt of condemnation of law got nailed to the cross with Jesus, hallelujah! Stay in Christ through a continuing faith in the forgiveness of sins his body and blood provides and that's exactly where that condemnation will stay--nailed to the cross and marked 'Satisfied--paid in full. Check # CALVARY'.

What ended was the law of Moses.

For the law was added until the Seed...

The law pointed to Christ.

The Law was fulfilled by Christ.

The being obsolete has vanished away.


JLB

 

[JLB]

Jethro said -

As long as you stay forgiven under the blood of Christ, the condemnation of the law has ended.

1 There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. Romans 8:1-2

The law that we are free from is not the law of Moses, but the law of sin and death.

The law of sin and death was violated in the Garden by Adam and has spread to all men through his sin.

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned-- 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Romans 5:12-13


JLB