What about the Ministration of Death gives life?

[TOG]

I've been having trouble logging on at home, and only have very limited time here at work, so I'm not able to answer this as completely as I would like to at this time. But here´s the short answer.

2 Cor 3:9 For if the ministration of condemnation (What is this?) be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.
2 Cor 3:10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.
2 Cor 3:11 For if that which is done away (What is this?) was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.

What is it? Simple. It's taken out of context so that it fit's your theology better. Here it is in context.

Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses' face because of its glory, which was being brought to an end, will not the ministry of the Spirit have even more glory? For if there was glory in the ministry of condemnation, the ministry of righteousness must far exceed it in glory. Indeed, in this case, what once had glory has come to have no glory at all, because of the glory that surpasses it. For if what was being brought to an end came with glory, much more will what is permanent have glory. (II Cor. 3:7-11)​

The glory on Moses' face after he had spoken to God face-to-face was so great that the people could not bare to look at it. When Moses died, that glory went with him. Paul is comparing the glory of Moses' ministry with the glory of the Holy Spirit's ministry. He's not saying that the law was fading away or that the law is done away with, but that the glory on Moses' face faded away and was done away with.

The TOG​

 

[Sinthesis]

There are ten commandments with 603 examples of thier implementation, no more no less, ten.

No human has ever been saved by the Law but the Mosaic Law does foreshadow the advent of Jesus, the Christ by demonstrating our hopeless estate. I am often lied on for teaching the Ten Commandments and yes, I said people claiming the Christ as their Saviour lied.

We are not bound by the Law, neither was the Jew. For God to expect a man to compete the Law, He had to send His Son to do it for us. But folks, please read Paul, the only disciple to be seated, one on one at the feet of Jesus for three years. (Gal. 1:15-18 and again in the Acts) in Gal. 3:24-26 we see that the Lost, without knowing it are bound to that Law and if we, the believers by faith, trash the number one too for them to know their sin, do we serve the Great Commission?

I largely agree. I think the motivation amongst some Christians to trash the law stems from a misunderstanding of the law's purpose and it's shortcomings. Outwardly keeping the law without faith in God is possible, and was condemned by John the Baptist as hypocrisy. Keeping the law without the expectation of a coming Messiah is futile. These are shortcomings which expose the law as inadequate: even beggarly in that the law needs both faith and the promised Messiah. Conversely, Christianity as expressed through faith in our Messiah does not need the written law, because it has the Holy Spirit as guide. We really should not trash the law just because we have something better, because for the most part these two guides will coincide. Yet it is also not expedient to elevate the law as equal to that whom it points. The law is not perfect because the law is not God.

 

[Eugene]

What is it? Simple. It's taken out of context so that it fit's your theology better. Here it is in context.

That’s pretty rough. Even in your translation I don’t see the law carved in stones called less than the ministry of death despite the glory in the manner it was given, nor does it negate the fact it only came as the result of sin.

Blessings.

​

 

[TOG]

That’s pretty rough. Even in your translation I don’t see the law carved in stones called less than the ministry of death despite the glory in the manner it was given, nor does it negate the fact it only came as the result of sin.

Blessings.

​

Maybe the wording was a bit rough. Although it's still technically true, you weren't the one that took it out of context, nor were you the one that invented your theology. You are just repeating what you've been taught. In fact, you are repeating what the great majority of Christians today have been taught. I am not blaming you for anything, and I appologise if it sounded that way.

Like I was trying to point out, it wasn't the law that was fading away in these verses, but the glory on Moses' face, which was a result of his close relationship to God. Paul is saying that the glory of the ministry of the Spirit, who will never die, is greater than the glory of the ministry of Moses, who did die. He is not sayint that the law has passed away.

The TOG

 

[TOG]

Sorry I haven't answered this earlier. I've been having problems with my computer at home, and haven't had enough time to answer it properly at work.

How do you reconcile that wth Gal 3:19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

Thanks.

I claimed earlier that the law was given to show us how God wants us to live. This verse say that the law was added because of transgressions. At first sight, there does indeed seem to be a conflict between those two statements. But that conflict quickly disappears when we realize a couple of simple things. The first is that many things, including the law, can serve more than one purpose. My computer serves many purposes. It enables me to post on Internet forums, do word processing, play computer games, organize my digital photo albums and more. To say something like "My computer was added (to my home) because of the Internet" would only be a partial truth. It would be true, but it wouldn't be the whole truth. It is true that the law was added because of transgressions, but that's only part of the truth.

The second thing I'd like to point out is something we've all experienced. When we were children, our parents gave us rules to follow, such as don't lie, be polite, share with others, don't take what isn't yours and many other rules. But those rules were never written down. They were given to us orally. Likewise, God gave his children rules that weren't necessarily written down. There is, for example, no indication that the rule He gave Adam and Eve not to eat of the tree in the middle of the garden was ever written down during their lifetimes. Neither were the rules God gave Noah or Abraham.

Back to our childhood rules. If everyone obeyed the rules their parents gave them, there would be no crime. All crimes, from petty theft to murder, are covered by one or more of the rules everyone learns in childhood. So, if the rules our parents teach us are enough, why do we have written laws? They were added because of our transgressions of our parents' rules. Since people can't be trusted to behave decently on their own, we need written laws to remind us how to behave and what the consequences are of behaving differently than the law says.

If you look again at the verse in Galatians, you'll see that the transgressions came before the law was given. What were people transgressing, if there was no law? God had already told them how they were to behave, but they disobeyed Him and lived any way they wanted to. Just like us today, they needed to have a written law to remind them how they were to live their lives and what the consequences are of not living the way God want's us to live.

So you see, there is no conflict. In fact, this verse confirms that the law was given to show us how to live.

The TOG

 

[jasoncran]

yes but its to put us to death. if we know to do good and don't do it, and don't reciecve the blood of Christ we are what? dead.

 

[Eugene]

I claimed earlier that the law was given to show us how God wants us to live. This verse say that the law was added because of transgressions. At first sight, there does indeed seem to be a conflict between those two statements. But that conflict quickly disappears when we realize a couple of simple things. The first is that many things, including the law, can serve more than one purpose.

Wow brother, I just cannot buy into supposition when the word is at stake. I would first ask where you read that the law was given to show us how to live. I do not personally know anyone except Jesus that ever did, and if that would be the standard Jesus died in vain.

Thanks in Jesus.

 

[jasoncran]

in the account of Abraham, he had a torah. he was aslo along the way told about god, and how to sacrifice. yet despite that he was called a friend of god when he repented.

 

[Eugene]

in the account of Abraham, he had a torah. he was aslo along the way told about god, and how to sacrifice. yet despite that he was called a friend of god when he repented.

Can you expound on this a bit? What torah? and what repentance are you speaking of. Thanks.

 

[TOG]

Wow brother, I just cannot buy into supposition when the word is at stake. I would first ask where you read that the law was given to show us how to live. I do not personally know anyone except Jesus that ever did, and if that would be the standard Jesus died in vain.

Thanks in Jesus.

Wow! I just can't believe this. How do I start to explain something that's so obvious that it shouldn't have to be explained to anybody?

Would a father tell his son to go to bed if he didn't want him to go to bed? Doesn't the fact that he tells his son to go to bed imply that that's what he wants him to do? Why would he tell his son to eat his vegetables, unless he wanted him to eat his vegetables? Would God tell us to honor our parents if He didn't want us to honor our parents? Why would He tell us not to help those in need unless he wants us to help those in need? I would have thought that it was obvious. But I guess some people need a written code to tell them everything. Hmmm....

The TOG

 

[jasoncran]

Can you expound on this a bit? What torah? and what repentance are you speaking of. Thanks.

instructions from god. in Hebrew they don't call the law the law its more of a torah. meaning a set of instructions from a father to a child.

 

[Eugene]

Why would He tell us not to help those in need unless he wants us to help those in need?

And yet God calls it a ministration of death? If thou wilt be perfect, do you know of anyone in need you aren't helping? The world over is pleading for help. Have you yet sold all you have and gave to the poor. Then if you can justify that Jesus was confronted with like reasoning in Mat 5:27-28. Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. Seems as if when a person thinks they were law keepers, it stretched even deeper but there is a remedy in Mat 5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. I met one man that attempted this, so in action more than just words he must have been doing the will of God huh?

 

[Eugene]

instructions from god. in Hebrew they don't call the law the law its more of a torah. meaning a set of instructions from a father to a child.

Thanks. I'll study into that and hopefully learn it.