God did away with some of His own sayings

[KennethC]

Kenneth... you are knee-jerk contending these days... relax... IF you re-read my comment as en ENTIRE THOUGHT... not just take a few words to argue about? You do not like it when others do this to you.

I did read your whole post as it was not that long, and you said the OT is the foundation of Christianity, and here is your quote again;

"The OT precedes New Covenant history... It is the very foundation of Christianity and the HISTORICAL/PROPHETIC proof for Christ to come. CHRIST is founded in the OT... it is not merely OLD and NEW."


Jesus Christ is the foundation and the OT only pointed to His coming and the future prophetic events that have taken place since and is still yet to come.

 

[pottersclay]

The old testament is the new testament hidden.
The new testament is the old revealed.

 

[BarlyGurl]

The old testament is the new testament hidden.
The new testament is the old revealed.

Exactly. thanks potter... and btw... it is B-a-r-l-yGurl

 

[pottersclay]

ooooops......put my glasses on and your .......right. barlygurl
Now who did I put for myself.........o yeah....sorry

 

[BenFTW]

The OT is not the foundation of Christianity, the Lord Jesus Christ Himself is the foundation of our faith/Christianity.

The OT is the standard to point one to Christ as the letter of the law brought condemnation, but grace through faith in the Lord brought eternal life.

Did I just like a KennethC post? Kenneth, have you left the dark side? lol

 

[pottersclay]

The old testament is the roots of Christianity.

 

[crossnote]

The old testament is the roots of Christianity.

To put it in simplified terms, as it realtes to faith, YES.
as it relates to Israel as a nation and it's numerous regulations, NO.

 

[Kaycie]

It simply is the truth that things were done physically in the Old Testament that are now done spiritually in the New Testament. If it were not true we would still have to stone people and sacrifice animals. Read Ephesians chapter six. Our wars are no longer with flesh and blood like they were in the Old Testament. David not only won the battle with Goliath, people were saying king Saul killed his thousands, but David his tens of thousands.

 

[BenFTW]

Exactly. thanks potter... and btw... it is B-a-r-l-yGurl

I agree with your point, but KennethC also makes a good point, the first biblically accurate thing I've seen him post. lol However, I think he read too much into what you were saying about it being a foundation to Christianity, as it is. It may not be the foundation in the area of our faith, but that wasn't what you were saying. You are just saying that the OT is important to our faith, and it is, so much is revealed about Jesus Christ, even so His role as High Priest and being the Lamb that was slain. So many shadows and types. So many paralleling truths. Throwing out the OT isn't smart, you would lose so much revelation about Jesus Christ and the plan of redemption/reconciliation.

 

[crossnote]

It simply is the truth that things were done physically in the Old Testament that are now done spiritually in the New Testament. If it were not true we would still have to stone people and sacrifice animals. Read Ephesians chapter six. Our wars are no longer with flesh and blood like they were in the Old Testament. David not only won the battle with Goliath, people were saying king Saul killed his thousands, but David his tens of thousands.

Until you get to Revelation , those are physical deaths and calamities going on.

 

[ERICA821]

The fact that there are two covenants, one old and another new points to the fact that one is fulfilled, or "abolished." Once you pay your mortgage on a house, I would recommend you stop sending payments to the bank. Its been fulfilled, in the same way we are no longer under Law trying to fulfill its requirements. Jesus did that on our behalf, and has imputed His righteousness to us.

I don't see why it sickens you when people say a particular part of God's Word doesn't apply to us, as we have gone from one covenant to another. You can't take that which is of the old and mix it with the new, unless the new states it as well. Its like a lot of the things Jesus said before He died on the cross and resurrected on the third day, it was to people under the Law, not in the new covenant reality of grace. For example, forgive others or the Lord won't forgive you. Thats an old testament principle. In the new it is stated that we forgive others as the Lord has forgiven us, meaning we already have the forgiveness. That is just one example.

Its all about rightly dividing the Word. Don't put Law into grace, because you then nullify it. That is why there is a distinction, that is why somethings are now 'void.' Mixture or balancing of Law and grace takes away from both, one is self-righteousness and the other imputed, no work of your own. You can't mix the two, it doesn't work.

I have to disagree. The mere fact there are two covenants is not reason enough to say one has been done away with. I would have to ask you to explain to me what Jesus meant when He said in Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to abolish but to fulfill"

Your analogy using the mortgage is a faulty one as it doesn't exactly line up with what actually happened. A better one would be to say I committed a crime and was standing before a judge... Let's say the crime was stealing a car and I was going to have to pay a fine of $100,000. In steps Jesus. He says He will gladly pay the fine for me, not because stealing cars is no longer against the law, but because He loves me and will gladly pay the fine so that my record will be wiped clean. He is fulfilling the requirement of the law FOR ME. Does this mean I can go out and steal another car? Of course not! The law still applies. Stealing cars is still against the law and I cannot and should not go out and steal another car just because I have been forgiven for stealing this car. However, I will be forever indebted to Jesus for so graciously doing this for me and will choose to obey the law from here on out. (This is not considered being "under the law"- which is an entirely different discussion altogether.) This in no way, shape, or form takes away from God's grace.

 

[crossnote]

I have to disagree. The mere fact there are two covenants is not reason enough to say one has been done away with. I would have to ask you to explain to me what Jesus meant when He said in Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to abolish but to fulfill"

Your analogy using the mortgage is a faulty one as it doesn't exactly line up with what actually happened. A better one would be to say I committed a crime and was standing before a judge... Let's say the crime was stealing a car and I was going to have to pay a fine of $100,000. In steps Jesus. He says He will gladly pay the fine for me, not because stealing cars is no longer against the law, but because He loves me and will gladly pay the fine so that my record will be wiped clean. He is fulfilling the requirement of the law FOR ME. Does this mean I can go out and steal another car? Of course not! The law still applies. Stealing cars is still against the law and I cannot and should not go out and steal another car just because I have been forgiven for stealing this car. However, I will be forever indebted to Jesus for so graciously doing this for me and will choose to obey the law from here on out. (This is not considered being "under the law"- which is an entirely different discussion altogether.) This in no way, shape, or form takes away from God's grace.

In light of your post (good points) where do you fit these in...

Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
(Rom 7:4)

or

For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
(Gal 2:19-20)

??

 

[pottersclay]

what do ya mean we're not stoning people any more.... tell that to haggee in the other thread. Lol

 

[BarlyGurl]

I agree with your point, but KennethC also makes a good point, the first biblically accurate thing I've seen him post. lol However, I think he read too much into what you were saying about it being a foundation to Christianity, as it is. It may not be the foundation in the area of our faith, but that wasn't what you were saying. You are just saying that the OT is important to our faith, and it is, so much is revealed about Jesus Christ, even so His role as High Priest and being the Lamb that was slain. So many shadows and types. So many paralleling truths. Throwing out the OT isn't smart, you would lose so much revelation about Jesus Christ and the plan of redemption/reconciliation.

Thank you for post Ben. Also, I would say... in addendum to the bolded words... in addition to revealing Christ, the OT is RICH in spiritual truths.

 

[BenFTW]

I have to disagree. The mere fact there are two covenants is not reason enough to say one has been done away with. I would have to ask you to explain to me what Jesus meant when He said in Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to abolish but to fulfill"

Your analogy using the mortgage is a faulty one as it doesn't exactly line up with what actually happened. A better one would be to say I committed a crime and was standing before a judge... Let's say the crime was stealing a car and I was going to have to pay a fine of $100,000. In steps Jesus. He says He will gladly pay the fine for me, not because stealing cars is no longer against the law, but because He loves me and will gladly pay the fine so that my record will be wiped clean. He is fulfilling the requirement of the law FOR ME. Does this mean I can go out and steal another car? Of course not! The law still applies. Stealing cars is still against the law and I cannot and should not go out and steal another car just because I have been forgiven for stealing this car. However, I will be forever indebted to Jesus for so graciously doing this for me and will choose to obey the law from here on out. (This is not considered being "under the law"- which is an entirely different discussion altogether.) This in no way, shape, or form takes away from God's grace.

Jesus paid the penalty for your sin, but he also set you free from the sin itself. We have died to sin, and are alive unto God. If you tell a lie, this lie isn't held against you. He remembers our sins no more, and also the blood of Christ cleanses us from all sin, therefore making our sins of scarlet white as snow. Or, sins of crimson white as wool.

The court room analogy although entertaining fails to note that the Law itself has been fulfilled, as in it wasn't just the penalty for sin that was paid, but also too the requirement of perfection. This is what is known as imputed righteousness. So while the analogy clearly shows Jesus paid the price for our sin (the debt/death) it doesn't show that He also set us free from its penality entirely, as He paid for all sin once for all time.

This isn't a license to sin, though it may seem like it is. However it isn't because we are new creations and have died to sin. We also too have died to the Law, as scripture says (Romans 7:4). Also, no longer under a school master, or tutor. We serve in the newness of the Spirit and not the oldness of the letter (Law).

There are objective moral standards. The problem is in thinking we must fulfill them in order to be saved. That is a works based Gospel, and not one of faith based righteousness (the only kind that has ever saved humanity). Self-righteousness is incapable of saving humanity. None are perfect. However, Jesus is and He has imputed His righteousness to us. Therefore as with the mercy seat on the Ark of the Covenant, so too when God looks at us He sees Jesus, and us washed/covered in His blood. He sees Jesus' righteousness. As scripture says of what He did on our behalf, "so that they may be the righteousness of God, in Jesus Christ."

PS: The Law has been nailed to the cross and the accuser disarmed. We don't serve through means of obedience to the Law, we aren't under it. We serve in the newness of the Spirit, not the letter. We walk in the fruit of the Spirit, and in the new creation we have been made to be. We awaken to righteousness and sin not, as scripture says (not a sinless perfectionist). We grow in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ and realize who we are in Him and what has changed in us by dying and resurrecting with Him, as symbolically shown in baptism. We renew our minds to these truths and then walk them out, fully believing.

 

[ERICA821]

In light of your post (good points) where do you fit these in...

Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
(Rom 7:4)

or

For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
(Gal 2:19-20)

??

Hi crossnote Good questions.

Since context is everything, you have to read all of Romans 7 to get a better understanding of what is being addressed here. After doing this, you will see that Paul is saying that when one is "dead to the law" he dies to the of law sin and death not to God's law which Paul states in verse 12 is " holy and just and good". The last verse of Romans 7 proves Paul is talking about 2 different laws (the law of sin and death and the law of God): "So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin."

We also have to read the verse you pointed out in Galatians 2 in context. (Let's read from verses 11-21). The original Greek for verse 19 specifically, is "Εγο γαρ δια νομου νομω απεθανον" and is translated "For I through Torah to legalism died" and in an expanded translation "For it was through letting the Torah speak for itself that I died to the traditional legalistic misinterpretation". Here Paul was expressing how he realized he could not be justified by the law, but through his faith in Jesus. Only then could he live for God. He was not however, saying that the law of God (Torah) was dead. To say that, would contradict what he said about the law of God in several other passages.

 

[just-me]

In light of your post (good points) where do you fit these in...

Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
(Rom 7:4)

or

For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
(Gal 2:19-20)

??

Are you quoting some of Paul's letters to the Romans and the Galatians in order to show us that he is a hypocrite and speaks with "forked tongue?" In light of your post that I quoted here, how do you fit in these following quotes of Paul with your quotes above?

But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets: Acts 24:14

Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. 1 Corinthians 11:1

Does Paul actually believe in all the law and the prophets in God's word (worshiping accordingly) and then teach that it's wrong to do that? I think your train of thought left the station before you got on board.

But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that
stumblingstone; Romans 9:31-32

Thou shalt not curse the deaf, nor put a stumblingblock before the blind, but shalt fear thy God: I am the Lord. Lev 19:14

Try comparing Romans 9:32 with Leviticus 19:14 and see the complete spiritual correlation between them as Paul saw. Then you will be doing what He said in 1 Corinthians 11:1

And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch. Matthew 15:14b

 

[just-me]

I agree with your point, but KennethC also makes a good point, the first biblically accurate thing I've seen him post. lol However, I think he read too much into what you were saying about it being a foundation to Christianity, as it is. It may not be the foundation in the area of our faith, but that wasn't what you were saying. You are just saying that the OT is important to our faith, and it is, so much is revealed about Jesus Christ, even so His role as High Priest and being the Lamb that was slain. So many shadows and types. So many paralleling truths. Throwing out the OT isn't smart, you would lose so much revelation about Jesus Christ and the plan of redemption/reconciliation.

AMEN! This is certainly true, and completely confirms with what Jesus told the Pharisees.

How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words? John 5:44-47

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Another law thread. How many of these do we need before said person gets the point, the law is a schoolmaster. That once the schoolmaster has done it job, and the student has graduated, the schoolmaster is no longer needed.

He is not done away (other people need him until they come to Christ) but his work is completed in those who have already come to Christ.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

HOW IS IT... that you come to the "bolded" conclusion????

Because the word of God says so?

Why would we follow a law which can never save anyone, Why should we be like jews. should we not be more like Christ?

I am so saddened so many people think following some religious law makes them holy and pleased God. when they will find out one day, God had so many things for them to do. so many people for them to touch and help. but they were so busy trying to follow some set of religious laws. they had no time to do anything else (not to mention they thought they were better or more righteous people then they really were)