Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
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/
-
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/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
Bible Study What does it mean for the law to get nailed to the cross? (Col. 2:13-14/ Eph. 2:11-16)
- Thread starter Jethro Bodine
- Start date
Jethro Bodine
Member
I had no disagreement with the way you explained this in the post that you did. A Christian comes under the law if they violate it and refuse the forgiveness of God. No argument here. The law is for unrighteous people, not people made righteous in Christ through the forgiveness of sin.
The sin debt was not the only thing nailed to the cross. For example, we were guilty before God because we did not keep the lawful requirement for blood sacrifice. But as you say, and which we both agree upon, the death penalty and condemnation for that violation of law was paid/satisfied at the cross. But it's impossible to argue that the lawful requirement for blood still stands between and against us and God anymore. That law itself also got taken out of the way at the cross and can no longer stand against us and keep us out of covenant with God and his people. So it too got nailed to the cross with Jesus. It does not continue as an ongoing, outstanding obligation of law. It was forever satisfied by the blood of Christ, one time, for all time....for the believer, not the unbeliever, or the one who turns away from their faith. It has been taken out of the way, marked 'satisfied'.
J
jocor
Guest
I believe the requirement for a blood sacrifice still stands. It has no claim on the believer because the believer has an ongoing blood sacrifice in Yeshua. The requirement to offer a blood sacrifice is fulfilled through Yeshua's sacrifice every time we sin. If the law concerning blood sacrifice was taken out of the way, then we are no longer required to offer a blood sacrifice when we sin. We can renounce Yeshua as our blood sacrifice without fear of any consequences. This law is actually established by faith in Yeshua's shed blood as our blood sacrifice.
Heb 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
Heb 10:5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
Heb 10:6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
Heb 10:7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
Heb 10:8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Heb 10:5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
Heb 10:6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
Heb 10:7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
Heb 10:8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
J
jocor
Guest
Yes, He took away the shedding of animal blood to establish the shedding of the blood of a sinless man. Why was Yeshua's blood shed? Because the law required the shedding of blood for the remission of sin (Heb 9:22). What happens if we sin today? Yeshua's shed blood cleanses us from sin upon confession of it (1Jn 1:9). If there is no law requiring a blood sacrifice, why would we need Yeshua's shed blood to cleanse us every time we sin?
GodsGrace
CF Ambassador
Hi jocor,
I've missed too much but Jethro does come up with really interesting threads.
Just quick, I may have missed the answer since I can't read everything.
Levitical priests:
The priesthood is still valid. Except that now we have a new a better priest, Jesus the Christ.
Hebrews 4:14
Also chapter 3 and Hebrews 7:17-28
So of course the requirement for a blood sacrifice still stands. It's been required from the beginning. An animal had to die and shed blood so Adam and Eve could be clothed. But Jesus was the last and great sacrifice and no more will be necessary - His lives on forever.
But the reason Jesus' sacrifice is sufficient for all time, is because He's God incarnate.
I'm pretty sure you don't believe this. I think you see Him more as a Messiah in the sense of being God's messenger, one who speaks in the name of the one who sent him and has the authority of the one who sent him.
You do, very much, get the idea from the O.T. that GOD HIMSELF will have to save His people because others have been unable to or have "led them astray". The idea runs all threw Ezekiel and Jeremiah, even Isaiah.
Psalm 18:2
Lamentations 3:25-26
(LORD, Yahweh)
Ezekiel 34:11-13
Also LORD, Yahweh I believe
So the Law was able to be nailed to the cross because a final and eternal sacrifice was made and because God Himself made it through Jesus, His son AND the 2nd person of the Triune Godhead, since the LORD had said that He, Himself, would save His people not a "man" since man could not be perfect and the sacrifice required a perfect lamb.
So my question would be: Could the Law have been nailed to the cross if a "man" was sent as a messenger from God, a messiah, or do you feel it had to be God making the sacrifice (as a man on earth)?
Wondering
GodsGrace
CF Ambassador
Hi Jethro,
After all the theological discussion, I'm sure, here's what I think about what it means to have the Law nailed to the cross. Sorry for the simplicity.
So I'm Cinderella. I have this stepmother. I work and work to try and please her. It's tough going trying to get those floors cleaned just right. She's never happy. Always thinking up something else I could do to make her be satisfied. It's never ending. Once in a great while, she'd find some stepdaughter that did the job well and she got to liking her - but boy, I'm not one of those.
My friend in town is daughter to a mother and father. They love her. She helps out around the house and they accept whatever she could do. If she doesn't do something right, they forgive her. Everything is appreciated. Whatever she doesn't get around to doing, or doesn't do well - they do it for her!
It's so far superior to my life as Cinderella. Wish there was some way I could belong to a loving family...
Wondering
After all the theological discussion, I'm sure, here's what I think about what it means to have the Law nailed to the cross. Sorry for the simplicity.
So I'm Cinderella. I have this stepmother. I work and work to try and please her. It's tough going trying to get those floors cleaned just right. She's never happy. Always thinking up something else I could do to make her be satisfied. It's never ending. Once in a great while, she'd find some stepdaughter that did the job well and she got to liking her - but boy, I'm not one of those.
My friend in town is daughter to a mother and father. They love her. She helps out around the house and they accept whatever she could do. If she doesn't do something right, they forgive her. Everything is appreciated. Whatever she doesn't get around to doing, or doesn't do well - they do it for her!
It's so far superior to my life as Cinderella. Wish there was some way I could belong to a loving family...
Wondering
Jethro Bodine
Member
The point is, it isn't against you any more. Because it's been satisfied by the blood of Christ for you when you believed. It's been taken out of the way in that regard. That law can't keep gentiles who don't know about the law out of covenant with God and his people anymore.
It was taken out of the way in regard to it blocking you and I from being in covenant God and his people. The enmity it once was to us is gone now. That enmity got nailed to the cross with Jesus because he satisfied it's requirements on our behalf so that it is no longer a source of enmity between us and God.
Exactly. So, since the requirement for blood sacrifice is fulfilled by our faith in the blood of Jesus, we don't need the Mosaic law for blood sacrifice anymore. It's been made obsolete and unneeded by the work of Christ on the cross. We don't need a law for blood sacrifice to do what Jesus has done for us already. Therefore, the Mosaic law for blood sacrifice has become obsolete and unneeded now. It can be laid aside. Not destroyed. It has been fulfilled, not destroyed as the church loves to assert happened to the law of Moses. Abolished, yes. Destroyed, no. Jesus said he came to fulfill the law, not destroy it.
Last edited:
J
jocor
Guest
It is an assumption to say the Law was nailed to the cross. Therefore, your question cannot be answered. However, I do believe God used a sinless man to make the sacrifice.
J
jocor
Guest
I don't see the Law "blocking" anyone from being in covenant with God. Gentiles were free to partake of the covenant just as Jews were. If anything willful sin is what blocked them.
I also do not see the Law as being against them. I do, however, see sin (the breaking of the Law) as being against them. It is sin that has a claim on people's lives and brings about death. The Law merely told them when they sinned.
jocor said:
By saying "Exactly," you acknowledged that the Law has been "established by faith", but then you say it was "made obsolete and unneeded." That is the opposite of "established".
Jethro Bodine
Member
I know you're not going to get this, so I'm not going to belabor the point:
BECAUSE the law gets established by faith--that is, fulfilled, satisfied, not violated, and whatever other word you can think of to describe the debt of that law being met--it can be laid aside as an outstanding requirement of law owed. That is what it means for that law to be abolished. It has no further application. That doesn't mean it got destroyed. It means it simply has no more use or application.
Here's a simple example to illustrate how a law becomes obsolete and unneeded, and thus, laid aside, but not destroyed:
No horses shall be tied up within 25ft. of a saloon.
That law did not get abolished. It's simply obsolete now. Now Rollo Tamasi pulls right up to the saloon in his 1976 Pacer Wagon. And the old law concerning how far away he had to park from the saloon remains intact, preserved, not violated, and so in that way it gets upheld, not destroyed by the new way. The law that kept him 25 ft. away from the saloon can't do that anymore. The new way of approaching the saloon does what the old law couldn't do, yet does not violate the old law.
J
jocor
Guest
If Rollo's Pacer Wagon breaks down (which is highly likely given its age) and he decides to use his old gray mare, he will not be able to tie it within 25 ft of the saloon. Why? Because that law still exists and he would violate it. Then he would have to deal with Judge Roy Bean.
Jethro Bodine
Member
And that is the part that most in the Protestant church don't accept. They see the law as being destroyed altogether, not fulfilled as long as they stay in the new way that makes the law inapplicable to them. They don't understand they have to maintain this new way to God (faith in Christ) that brings them close to Him, and that if they don't they will come back under the law that kept them away from God.
As long as Rollo Tamasi stays in the '76 Pacer.....I mean Christ.....the law legislating his distance from God's spring of living water can in no way hinder his closeness to that watering hole the way it did before. And that is the point that Colossians 2:13-14 and Ephesians 2:11-16 NASB are making. The law legislating that a certain distance be kept between Rollo Tamasi and God and communion with him through the Holy Spirit was abolished for him when he was legitimately brought near to God through Christ, in effect side stepping the law that kept him at a distance. Any debt of law he had prior to being in Christ was removed through Christ. That law was not destroyed, as many in the church insist. It got fulfilled in that when the owner of the spring looked at the law requiring his distance from the spring, he turned to Rollo and said, "I see no violation of law here. Drink up."
Last edited:
GodsGrace
CF Ambassador
What do you believe was nailed to the cross?
How could a "man" make the sacrifice that would satisfy God?
Exodus 11 and 12 calls for a perfect lamb to be eaten. The "eaten" part would refer to communion.
The perfect part would refer to Jesus. No mere man could be sinless.
Romans 3:23
Only God is perfect, so only God could make the sacrifice to forgive sins.
Jesus was the perfect High Priest and does not die like the high priests of old, but lives on forever to stand in our defense and be our advocate. Hebrews 4:14-15 Hebrews 7:23-25
Are you following the law? Are you following ceremonial and civil law? Or just the moral law?
If you've done away with ceremonial and civil law, why would you still be following moral law?
Jesus Himself said we're to follow moral law, Mathew 5:18
In Mathew Jesus says that not the smallest letter of the Law shall pass away until all is accomplished.
Until what is accomplished? The fulfillment of the Law. And when was the Law fulfilled?
John 19:30 IT IS FINISHED
And what was finished? The demands of the Law. The debt that we have toward the Law.
In Luke 16:19-30 the people in Abraham's Bossom were awaiting the sacrifice of Christ so they could be released into heaven. So Jesus paid the debt that we owed for all the sins that were ever committed since the beginning of time. Again, something man could not do because the only way man could pay for sins is to go to hell and even then it would be only for his personal sins. I could not pay for your sins - only for mine.
In paying the debt, the Law also becomes of null effect. What power does the Law have over me, if someone is willing to pay my debt? Rollo could use his old grey mare and go up to the saloon. When the sheriff gives him a ticket, someone will pay the ticket. That's pretty much the same as the law being laid aside. The Law has no effect on him - someone is taking care of the debt.
However, because Rollo is a man made righteous by knowing the sheriff, he won't WANT to park his mare at the saloon. He WILL obey the Law. But because he's righteous, not because he's AFRAID of the law.
If you live under the law, you will be judged by the law. Romans 2:12 speaks of how one living under the Law will be judged by that law. It goes on to say that man is a hypocrite because he teaches others what he himself does not do. It's impossible to keep the law - which is why it's dangerous to live under it.
Galatians 4:4.9 We were redeemed from the Law that we might receive adoption as sons so that we are no longer a slave. verse 9: Why would we turn back again to the weak and elemental things (which we serve while under the law).
Galatians 3:10 Those under the works of the Law are under a curse. Paul quotes here Deuteronomy 27:26
Cursed are they who do not abide by ALL THINGS written in the book of the Law.
So, Jocor, if someone doesn't abide by ALL THINGS written in the book of the Law, he will be under condemnation because he's trusting in the Law to save him instead of trusting in Jesus to save him. And Jesus can't save anyone if He's just a man. Those who trust in Him are being saved because they know they can't keep all the commandments and are trusting in Him and His fulfillment of them.
But God cannot be mocked. We are to keep the moral commandments to the best of our ability. But we are not to TRUST in them for our salvation ( through works ).
Wondering
Last edited:
Here's Rollo showing the Law his get out of jail free card.
No, that's a '76 Pacer I'm in.
Jethro says I'm safe in that.
We must always listen to Jethro.
