License to Sin

[Delvianna]

@Magenta
Advocating that the law no longer applies is like people advocating to defund the police. The best way I can sum up what Jesus did on the cross is this:

If I went over to your house and smashed one of your windows, you'd be seriously upset with me. We could talk it out, and you could forgive me, but the law still says that's destruction of property, and I'm still responsible for making restitution to pay for the damage I caused.

Now, let's put that in biblical terms. The animal sacrifices never actually paid for sin. They restored fellowship with God, but they did not satisfy the debt that justice required. In other words, we could be reconciled to God, yet the obligation for the damage caused by sin still remained. That's where Jesus comes in. Through His sacrifice, we are not only fully reconciled to the Father, but the law's requirement for restitution is also completely fulfilled. He paid the debt we could never pay ourselves.

This is why Jesus says he didn't come to "abolish" the law, but to "fulfill" it. Saying the law is obsolete is arguing it's abolished, which Jesus himself said he didn't do. The law still exists, just we don't have to pay the debt to it. And scripture says that only those that follow the law, will be chosen as sons and daughters.

 

[Magenta]

@Magenta
Advocating that the law no longer applies

Are you suggesting that is what I am doing? If so, please stop falsely accusing me.

 

[Delvianna]

Are you suggesting that is what I am doing? If so, please stop falsely accusing me.

No. I'm not accusing you of not following God's law. I haven't made any accusation about your personal obedience. I was explaining a theological position and how your stance is inaccurate when you said "The old one is obsolete".

 

[Magenta]

No. I'm not accusing you of not following God's law. I haven't made any accusation about your personal obedience. I was explaining a theological position and how your stance is inaccurate when you said "The old one is obsolete".

I am sorry you do not believe Scripture. Hebrews 8 v 13

By speaking of a new covenant, He has made the first one
obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.

 

[Delvianna]

I am sorry you do not believe Scripture. Hebrews 8 v 13

By speaking of a new covenant, He has made the first one
obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.

So in your belief, does that ignore the law, or are we still required to follow it?

 

[Magenta]

So in your belief, does that ignore the law, or are we still required to follow it?

It sure as heck ain't the law of Moses.

 

[Delvianna]

It sure as heck ain't the law of Moses.

There is only 1 law. God's law which was given to Moses. So again, my response to you in post #181 is accurate. You're advocating that the law is abolished when Jesus said he wasn't there to do it. So how do you reconcile that? You can't have Jesus himself say he isn't doing away with the law, but you're saying the law of Moses doesn't apply. That's literally abolishment.

 

[Cameron143]

So in your belief, does that ignore the law, or are we still required to follow it?

The old covenant focused on the law and the sacrificial system. The new covenant focuses on Christ and the Spirit. Who having Christ living in them and walking according to the Spirit is not keeping the law? But their focus is not on keeping the law. Their minds and hearts are simply stayed on things above.

 

[Delvianna]

The old covenant focused on the law and the sacrificial system. The new covenant focuses on Christ and the Spirit. Who having Christ living in them and walking according to the Spirit is not keeping the law? But their focus is not on keeping the law. Their minds and hearts are simply stayed on things above.

Staying on things above would be focused on still keeping the law because the law came from above. The new covenant includes Jesus, its a covenant that ADDS to it, not subtract or a re-focus.

Remember, the law was given by the Father. Jesus says he follows ALL the Fathers commands. So if you're going to take up the new covenant with Jesus, that includes ALL the Fathers commands as well. You don't ignore what the Father said or even partially follow what the Father said either. You either follow it, or you don't. Partially gets you into the luke-warm camp which Jesus says he will spit you out of His mouth.

 

[Cameron143]

Staying on things above would be focused on still keeping the law because the law came from above. The new covenant includes Jesus, its a covenant that ADDS to it, not subtract or a re-focus.

Remember, the law was given by the Father. Jesus says he follows ALL the Fathers commands. So if you're going to take up the new covenant with Jesus, that includes ALL the Fathers commands as well. You don't ignore what the Father said or even partially follow what the Father said either. You either follow it, or you don't. Partially gets you into the luke-warm camp which Jesus says he will spit you out of His mouth.

I got you to the water. You're going to have to drink.

You weren't saved so you could keep the law. You were saved to have communion with God. Those that relate to God on the basis of their behavior find themselves continually separated from this communion. Those who relate to God by the Spirit do not.

Both possibilities are available to you. Only one will prove to satisfy.

 

[Delvianna]

You weren't saved so you could keep the law. You were saved to have communion with God. Those that relate to God on the basis of their behavior find themselves continually separated from this communion. Those who relate to God by the Spirit do not.

Contradicts John 15:10 If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love(agapē).

Love... Agape love at that... That's communion with God if you follow the law and stay in His love. Behavior increases closeness.

 

[Cameron143]

Contradicts John 15:10 If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love(agapē).

Love... Agape love at that... That's communion with God if you follow the law and stay in His love. Behavior increases closeness.

Again, I got you to the water. You can live in your own strength or God's.

Grace and peace.

 

[Delvianna]

Again, I got you to the water. You can live in your own strength or God's.

Grace and peace.

This isn't an argument for either or. As the only way to follow the law is WITH God's strength. But the agreement (covenant) has to be there first.

Shalom Shalom to you as well.

 

[Aaron56]

There is only 1 law. God's law which was given to Moses. So again, my response to you in post #181 is accurate. You're advocating that the law is abolished when Jesus said he wasn't there to do it. So how do you reconcile that? You can't have Jesus himself say he isn't doing away with the law, but you're saying the law of Moses doesn't apply. That's literally abolishment.

@Magenta
@Cameron143

Nope.

You're taking "torah" out of its context. You must determine if "torah" means law of the land, the law given at Sinai, or the nature of God.

God directly influenced two torahs: the torah at Sinai and His personal torah, the torah of His character and being. Both may be called "the book of the law" but only the one from Sinai can be written down. The nature of God cannot be contained in a book. Although the Sinai law provides insight into His nature, it is merely a shadow of the reality of His character and being.

The torah of God was not given at Sinai. The torah at Sinai was added because of transgressions. Since there was no written law at the time of the transgressions, the only torah to obey was the one from God directly: His voice. Abraham modeled this as well as others (Noah, Melchizedek, etc.) God intended to bring the people up in order to be in His presence. Yet, they chose Moses to go up in their stead, to hear from God and report back to them. This was the transgression. It happened at the base of Sinai. So, when Moses arose to hear God, Moses was not given the torah of God. He was given a law that addressed transgressions.

This is why Paul refers to the Sinai law as "the law of sin" or "the law of sin and death". God's nature is life. This is why Paul refers to the torah of God as "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus". No one in their right mind would refer to the nature of God as "the law of sin and death"!

Even so, the law of Sinai remains. But the question is "For whom does it remain?" Paul is very clear on that:

"But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully..."

Okay, so let's see what it is good for...

"..knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person..."

Oh, so if one is righteous then the law of Sinai is not for him or her. Clear. But let's read on...

"[the law is made] for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, 11according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust."

So, if you say you must follow the torah of Sinai you must be a member of at least one of these groups:

lawless (ironic)
insubordinate
ungodly
sinners
unholy
profane
murderers of parents
manslayers
fornicators
sodomites
kidnappers
liars
perjurers
etc.

So, which group do you belong to?
You may choose more than one.

 

[Magenta]

There is only 1 law. God's law which was given to Moses. So again, my response to you in post #181 is accurate. You're advocating that the law is abolished when Jesus said he wasn't there to do it. So how do you reconcile that? You can't have Jesus himself say he isn't doing away with the law, but you're saying the law of Moses doesn't apply. That's literally abolishment.

So you lied the first time? Thanks for admitting that.

You just broke the whole law. Do you pretend to keep it?
Also: Ephesians 2 v 15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments
contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

 

[Delvianna]

So you lied the first time? Thanks for admitting that.

You just broke the whole law. Do you pretend to keep it?
Also: Ephesians 2 v 15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments
contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

Do you not understand the difference between having a discussion about theology and personally going after someone? I don't think you do since you just made this personal. No where did I lie.

Shalom to you.

 

[Blade]

You must have missed the part about it being a NEW covenant. The old one is obsolete.

I like the song playing.. Mercy by Matt Redman. This is the age of grace.. thank you so much Father for sending Jesus Christ.

 

[Soyeong]

There is nothing about the Mosaic Covenant being obsolete that means that the Nee Covenant doesn’t involve God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts. God’s character traits are eternal, so everything that God’s covenants teach us about how to know Him through embodying His character traits is eternal and cumulatively valid. For example, God’s righteousness is eternal (Psalm 119:142), therefore all of God’s righteous laws are also eternal (Psalm 119:160). New covenant do not nullify the promises of covenants that have already been ratified, so God’s covenants are eternal and cumulatively valid. One thing can only make another thing obsolete to the extent that it has cumulative functionality, so a computer makes a typewriter obsolete but does not make a plow obsolete, which means that if the New Covenant involves doing something different that was not cumulative with the Mosaic Covenant, then it could not make it obsolete. The Mosaic Covenant is eternal (Exodus 31:16, Leviticus 24:8), which means that the only way that it can be made obsolete by the New Covenant is if it is cumulative with it. So the New Covenant still involves following the Torah (Hebrews 8:10), plus it is cumulatively based on better promises and has a superior mediator (Hebrews 8:6). The reason why Jesus established the New Covenant was not so that we could continue to have the same lawlessness that caused it to be needed in the first place.

 

[Soyeong]

The old covenant focused on the law and the sacrificial system. The new covenant focuses on Christ and the Spirit. Who having Christ living in them and walking according to the Spirit is not keeping the law? But their focus is not on keeping the law. Their minds and hearts are simply stayed on things above.

That is a false dichotomy. The Law of Moses is His instructions for how to embody His character traits and His character traits are the fruits of the Spirit, which is why the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey it (Ezekiel 36:26-27).

Again, I got you to the water. You can live in your own strength or God's.

Grace and peace.

God did not give the Law of Moses as instructions for how to rely on our own strength. Relying on our own strength does not involve relying on anyone else, so it is contradictory to rely on our own strength by obediently relying on God's instructions. Relying on our own strength would be doing something that is completely independent of anything that God has instructed.

 

[Soyeong]

@Magenta
@Cameron143

Nope.

You're taking "torah" out of its context. You must determine if "torah" means law of the land, the law given at Sinai, or the nature of God.

The Torah was given at Sinai in order to teach us how to embody the nature of God, which includes instructions for how to do that in the land of Israel.

God directly influenced two torahs: the torah at Sinai and His personal torah, the torah of His character and being. Both may be called "the book of the law" but only the one from Sinai can be written down. The nature of God cannot be contained in a book. Although the Sinai law provides insight into His nature, it is merely a shadow of the reality of His character and being.

It would be overwhelming to us to exhaustively teach us how to embody the nature of God in every possible situation, so the point of the Torah is to teach us how to do that by abstracting it from a limited set of instructions that all have the nature of God common. If we correctly understand the nature of God, then it will lead us to take actions that embody it in accordance with what the Torah instructs even in situations that it does not specifically address.

The torah of God was not given at Sinai. The torah at Sinai was added because of transgressions. Since there was no written law at the time of the transgressions, the only torah to obey was the one from God directly: His voice. Abraham modeled this as well as others (Noah, Melchizedek, etc.) God intended to bring the people up in order to be in His presence. Yet, they chose Moses to go up in their stead, to hear from God and report back to them. This was the transgression. It happened at the base of Sinai. So, when Moses arose to hear God, Moses was not given the torah of God. He was given a law that addressed transgressions.

In Deuteronomy 5:31-33, Moses wrote down everything that God spoke to him without departing from it, which is why the Torah of Moses is called the Torah of God in verses like Nehemiah 8:1-8, Ezra 7:6-12, and Luke 2:22-23.

This is why Paul refers to the Sinai law as "the law of sin" or "the law of sin and death". God's nature is life. This is why Paul refers to the torah of God as "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus". No one in their right mind would refer to the nature of God as "the law of sin and death"!

In Romans 7:25-8:7, Paul said that he served the Law of God with his mind in contrast with saying that he served the law of sin with his flesh, he said that the Law of the Spirit has freed us from the law of sin and death, and he contrasted those who walk in the Spirit with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to the Law of God, so the law of sin and death does not refer to the Law of God. Rather, Paul spoke about the Law of God as being something that is the good that he wanted to do in contrast with the law of sin as being something that was causing him not to do the good that he wanted to do. Indeed, no one in their right mind would refer to the nature of God as the law of sin and death, which is why the the Sinai law should not be called the law of sin and death. The Torah is our very life (Deuteronomy 32:46-47).

Even so, the law of Sinai remains. But the question is "For whom does it remain?" Paul is very clear on that:

"But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully..."

Okay, so let's see what it is good for...

"..knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person..."

Oh, so if one is righteous then the law of Sinai is not for him or her. Clear. But let's read on...

"[the law is made] for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, 11according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust."

So, if you say you must follow the torah of Sinai you must be a member of at least one of these groups:

lawless (ironic)
insubordinate
ungodly
sinners
unholy
profane
murderers of parents
manslayers
fornicators
sodomites
kidnappers
liars
perjurers
etc.

So, which group do you belong to?
You may choose more than one.

What did those verses do to you? If someone abuses those poor verses into saying that that the Torah is only for those who are doers of unrighteous works in order to justify their freedom to be a doer of unrighteousness works, then they thereby become someone that the Torah is for. In Isaiah 51:7, the righteous are those on whose heart is the Torah, and in 1 John 3:4-7, do not be deceived, everyone who is a doer of righteous works in obedience to the Torah is righteous even as they are righteous.