C
CountryPeter
Guest
I am a believer that the Law of God is forever, because that is how we know what sin is. No one will be robbing banks in heaven
Why the "NT-only, grace-only" theology is off the mark
- Thread starter WomanLovesTX
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
C
cfultz3
Guest
C
cfultz3
Guest
Could not agree with you more, without a knowledge of God's moral Law, well then, we could define love any old way we wish.
C
CountryPeter
Guest
In Roman 2:13 Paul said not the hearers of the Law shall be just before God but the doers of the Law will be justified
C
CountryPeter
Guest
But of course that never suggests that law keeping is our salvation, that is only possible with a Saviour Jesus, but still the verse is there and it shows that when we except our Saviour he wants us to come into harmony with his law, otherwise we would still be rebels
C
CountryPeter
Guest
Different Covenant, same Laws. The problem was never with the Laws, it was with the people...
Heb 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
Heb 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
Deu 5:29 O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!
The Laws were perfect...
Psa 19:7 The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
The problem is with people...
Rom 8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
The carnal mind is at enmity with God and cannot keep His Laws.
C
CountryPeter
Guest
C
CountryPeter
Guest
C
CountryPeter
Guest
Isaiah 1:18 "Come now, let us reason together," says the LORD.
During the early days of the NT times, only the OT existed. So, when the NT was being written, they only had one source to explain themselves. One source to give the definitions to the words and phrases they were using. One source to put to the test all that was being written. The OT, or what they called the Tanakh. Just as the Bereans tested everything Paul said to the scriptures, we need to do the same to our own beliefs. In order for us to truly understand the full context of the NT, we have to obtain a firm foundation and understanding, which can only be grounded in the OT. It's the OT that serves as the road map to guide us through all that came to be called the NT and that which is still yet to come. If we hold to something that does not line up in agreement with the OT, then we are saying that God's word contradicts itself and it shows that we are off the map and going in our own direction.
Not to offend you cfultz3, but you fail to mention that the covenant you speak of was the New Covenant (Jer. 31:31), that which was promised to, and made with "the house of Israel and the house of Judah" (Heb. 8:8-12). Jesus ratified this covenant on the night of the Last Supper 2000 years ago. So, contrary to dispensational interpretations, it is not on hold. It has been in effect for 2000 years. Please read chapters 8-10 in Hebrews and discover that these Hebrew-Israelites were the nucleus of the first century church. James also, tells us that "the twelve tribes...scattered abroad" (James 1:1) in the first century were the nucleus of the church. This has not changed in 2000 years. Literal genetic Israel, found in historic Christianity, is still the nucleus of the church. The Dispensationalist-Futurist establishment does not want us to know this.
John tells us how to define love...
1Jn 5:2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
1Jn 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.
Paul was on the same wavelength...
Rom 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
1Co 7:19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.
WomanLovesTX, I agree but would add that the "OT" and "NT" you speak of are one and the same with the Old and New covenants, and that the New Covenant, that which was promised to, and made with "the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah (Jer. 31:31) is explained in Hebrews (chapters 8-10) as in effect with literal genetic Israel 2000 years ago. Please read these texts and discover that it was Israelites, Jew and non-Jew, who were the nucleus of the first century church. This has not changed in the 2000 years since. This only, explains why Christianity is Eurocentric, why it was and is, not found proportionately among the other "...families of the earth" (Amos 3:2). The religious establishment does not want us to know this.
C
cfultz3
Guest
We all agree with that, only a fool will say that we can be lawless. However, the discussion is about which Covenant we are under, the one called the Old Testament or the one called the New Covenant.
C
cfultz3
Guest
Agreed, different Covenant, but same Law (collectively). This consideration only remains: which part of the Law is still in effect for the Christian (what Christ has not fulfilled). I am willing to gambling on this and say that that which remains for the Christian is the moral Law, seeing that the concept of Jesus' Covenant is Love (which is defined by the written moral laws found in the Old Covenant).
Agreed again, the problem is with the people because of the weakness of the flesh. Jesus had to bring in a different Covenant which was not for the flesh but for the spirit. And it is because of this new Covenant, that there is this new method of being led to "keep all My commandments".
My only contention is the method people speak about. Some say that we are to obey the whole written Law by the flesh, while others says that we are to obey the Spirit who uses that same moral Law to led by our spirit. If Jesus came with the final Message from God, then we ought to give the more earnest heed to what His message pertains to, seeing that He is the Son sent from God. His message tells us that obedience is to His Spirit, inasmuch as it was for the Hebrews who were to have followed the Voice of the Lord. His Message was Love and how it is that Love which fulfills the Law. I suppose and purpose that it is spiritual love by which we are led, and not by physical obedience, seeing that spiritual love will fulfill the requirements of physical obedience.
No, the question is which Laws are the Laws of the New Covenant. No one is quesitoning which Covenant. There are those who claim that the Law has been changed (fulfilled) and we do not have to keep it anymore.
danschance, if as you imply, grace negates "law," does this mean that sin is no longer "...the transgression of the law" (1 John 3:4)? Does this mean was John confused when reminding us that "...sin is the transgression of the law" (1 John 3:4)?Do you not realize that your interpretation of "law" negates the entire Law of the Lord, and therefore the entirety of Psalm 1 and all 176 verses in Psalm 119. Yes, the entirety of Psalm 119, the longest chapter in scripture, is on the Law of the Lord. And you dismiss this, as though it was never more than some religious hocus pocus. Psalm 1:2, speaking of the righteous, says "...his delight is in the law of the Lord." Please consider that "law," in the NT epistles must be interpreted in context. And context tells us that Paul was not contradicting John, and John was not contradicting Paul. The bottom line here is that your broad interpretation of "law" in Paul's epistles contradicts what John and other witnesses say regarding it.