Hoping this helps those for whom it is a blessing to their search of this particular important topic.
Jesus was a Jew. Salvation is of the Jews. (The Book of John chapter 4 verse 22)
Article link below includs its Mp3 audio Teaching
The meaning behind God’s Law
January 1, 2015/by Ronald Dart
One of the most persistent topics of conversation, and point of contention, has been the Law. This is nothing new, because this was a point of contention during the first century also:
Why is it people play “hopscotch” through the Old Testament, keeping this law but not keeping that one right next to it? What is the criteria that we use to decide that we would do this but we would not do that? Others ask us, “Well, is this law (pointing to a passage from scripture) required for salvation?” Well, the answer is “No, that law is not required for salvation. But it is a sin if you do not do that law.”
Other people make a distinction between the Ten Commandments and the rest of the law. For example, they believe the Ten Commandments are valid, but the rest of the Law is not. Some people will distinguish between the Law of God on the one hand, and the law of Moses on the other; feeling that if it can be identified as the Law of God we should keep it, but if it’s a matter of the law of Moses then that’s done away with and there’s no obligation to keep that law. Still others distinguish between the Moral Law and the ceremonial law, and try to make the distinction based upon whether or not it is a ritual or sacrifice of some sort and those are done away, whereas the other aspects of the Law are not. One group contends that all of the Law was nailed to the cross, including the Ten Commandments, but that nine of the Commandments were reinstated in the New Testament.
A lot of people are more concerned with asking, “Well, do I have to do this or not?” rather than asking the question, “What does this law mean; what’s the underlying principle?” Too few people ever get around to asking, “Why?” And it’s the only question that’s important. The question, “Why” is the key to understanding why God gave those laws.
God would not and did not give to man a law that was bad for man. God’s Law is not arbitrary. God did not sit back one day and say, “Gee. These people need laws, and I must, at this point, determine what is going to be right and what is going to be wrong. Let’s see. This is fun, so I will make that wrong. Etc.” It is not an arbitrary decision. God made man, and He knows man, and scripture is God’s instruction book to man. God, having created man, began to communicate with man a way of life and things to do that were good for man, and save him from hurt and trouble and heartache that might come his way. So God, when He speaks to man, tells him something that is good for man.
But, there’s a “problem” with that, because as we begin to read through the Law, we’re going to occasionally find laws that are a little bit annoying; you’re going to find some that are deeply and profoundly troubling. For example, the laws regarding slavery:
But my point is, it’s not so much that we’re getting the wrong answers as it is that we’re asking the wrong questions, or maybe we’re not asking the best questions. For example, “Is the law of Moses still binding upon bondservants of Christ?” or “Is keeping this law required for salvation?” There are implicit assumptions in these questions that make these questions invalid. For example, asking, “Is keeping this law required for salvation?” assumes that there are some laws that are.
Whereas, in fact, the purpose of the Law is not to achieve salvation, it’s not even for that purpose, it is absolutely irrelevant to it. And the question, “Is the law of Moses still binding upon bondservants of Christ?” What does the word “binding” mean? Meaning you’re supposed to do it? Well, if you don’t do it, what happens to you? It’s another way of asking the same question, “Is it required for salvation?” In other words, this assumes a role for the Law that God never intended the Law to take.
Well, Paul quotes from this law, and in a letter to the gentile assembly at Corinth, brings this in as an illustration to something he’s trying to say. Let’s read this chapter to get a full understanding of it.
For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? Or saith he it altogether for our sakes?…” 1 Corinthians 9:9-10
Now that is a very interesting statement. Does God really care that much about that animal you work with out there? And if you feed that animal before he goes to work, then work that animal and feed it after it works for you, if you’re sure the animal gets plenty to eat, what does God care whether or not you muzzle that animal while it treads up and down the corn? Paul’s’ answer is:
“… For our sakes, no doubt, this is written…” 1 Corinthians 9:10
Jesus was a Jew. Salvation is of the Jews. (The Book of John chapter 4 verse 22)
Article link below includs its Mp3 audio Teaching
The meaning behind God’s Law
January 1, 2015/by Ronald Dart
One of the most persistent topics of conversation, and point of contention, has been the Law. This is nothing new, because this was a point of contention during the first century also:
“But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.” Titus 3:9
Many people ask, “Which Old Testament laws should we keep today?” For example, some may ask whether or not it is right to wear a wool and polyester suit; if this is a violation of the Old Testament law that forbids a garment of mixed fabric, such as wool and linen, to come upon our flesh (Deuteronomy 22:11). Some are concerned as to whether or not the elastic around the band at the top of socks would constitute the mixing of fabrics together; there are people that feel they need to take the elastics out of socks.Why is it people play “hopscotch” through the Old Testament, keeping this law but not keeping that one right next to it? What is the criteria that we use to decide that we would do this but we would not do that? Others ask us, “Well, is this law (pointing to a passage from scripture) required for salvation?” Well, the answer is “No, that law is not required for salvation. But it is a sin if you do not do that law.”
Other people make a distinction between the Ten Commandments and the rest of the law. For example, they believe the Ten Commandments are valid, but the rest of the Law is not. Some people will distinguish between the Law of God on the one hand, and the law of Moses on the other; feeling that if it can be identified as the Law of God we should keep it, but if it’s a matter of the law of Moses then that’s done away with and there’s no obligation to keep that law. Still others distinguish between the Moral Law and the ceremonial law, and try to make the distinction based upon whether or not it is a ritual or sacrifice of some sort and those are done away, whereas the other aspects of the Law are not. One group contends that all of the Law was nailed to the cross, including the Ten Commandments, but that nine of the Commandments were reinstated in the New Testament.
A lot of people are more concerned with asking, “Well, do I have to do this or not?” rather than asking the question, “What does this law mean; what’s the underlying principle?” Too few people ever get around to asking, “Why?” And it’s the only question that’s important. The question, “Why” is the key to understanding why God gave those laws.
God would not and did not give to man a law that was bad for man. God’s Law is not arbitrary. God did not sit back one day and say, “Gee. These people need laws, and I must, at this point, determine what is going to be right and what is going to be wrong. Let’s see. This is fun, so I will make that wrong. Etc.” It is not an arbitrary decision. God made man, and He knows man, and scripture is God’s instruction book to man. God, having created man, began to communicate with man a way of life and things to do that were good for man, and save him from hurt and trouble and heartache that might come his way. So God, when He speaks to man, tells him something that is good for man.
But, there’s a “problem” with that, because as we begin to read through the Law, we’re going to occasionally find laws that are a little bit annoying; you’re going to find some that are deeply and profoundly troubling. For example, the laws regarding slavery:
“And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.” Exodus 21:20-21
Now, when I read that, it created a very serious personal crisis for me, because I said to myself, “How can a God who is good take such a callous look at man, and see them treated as chattel and property in that way?” The purpose of this law shows that it should be presumed that the man died through some other cause. And all penal laws should be construed as favorably as possible to the accused. The phrase “he is his money” means that the master had such a monied interest in the continued life of his servant, that it was not to be concluded that he meant to kill him, unless there should be clear evidence of the fact. Therefore, these laws still fall into the category that God did not give to man a law that was bad for man.But my point is, it’s not so much that we’re getting the wrong answers as it is that we’re asking the wrong questions, or maybe we’re not asking the best questions. For example, “Is the law of Moses still binding upon bondservants of Christ?” or “Is keeping this law required for salvation?” There are implicit assumptions in these questions that make these questions invalid. For example, asking, “Is keeping this law required for salvation?” assumes that there are some laws that are.
Whereas, in fact, the purpose of the Law is not to achieve salvation, it’s not even for that purpose, it is absolutely irrelevant to it. And the question, “Is the law of Moses still binding upon bondservants of Christ?” What does the word “binding” mean? Meaning you’re supposed to do it? Well, if you don’t do it, what happens to you? It’s another way of asking the same question, “Is it required for salvation?” In other words, this assumes a role for the Law that God never intended the Law to take.
“Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn.” Deuteronomy 25:4
Now, this is an interesting law. And you might ask, “Should a bondservant of Christ feel bound by this law?” In the first place, we could ask, “Is this is a ceremonial law, or is it a moral law?” Well, there certainly isn’t any ritual involved with it. Yet, on the other hand, is it a question of morality whether or not you feed an ox while he’s actually working or before he starts working? “Is this the Law of God or is it the law of Moses?” someone else may ask. Well, that’s a difficult question to answer, but most would assume, from where it is, that’s it’s the law of Moses. “What if I don’t have an ox? Do I need to go out and buy one?” Yes, this is an absurd question, but it’s one that has to follow the question, “How binding is this law upon us?” Or maybe we can ask, “Was this law nailed to the cross?”Well, Paul quotes from this law, and in a letter to the gentile assembly at Corinth, brings this in as an illustration to something he’s trying to say. Let’s read this chapter to get a full understanding of it.
“Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord? If I be not an apostle unto others, yet doubtless I am to you: for the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord. Mine answer to them that do examine me is this, Have we not power to eat and to drink?” 1 Corinthians 9:1-4
Now, what does he mean by this question? Of course they can eat and drink; everybody can. Well, in context, what Paul is actually saying is this. Don’t I have the authority, at the assembly’s expense, based upon the money you people give to the Christ’s assembly, to eat and drink; in other words, to buy a meal when I’m on a trip for the assembly or when I’m here for the assembly? Don’t I have the authority to pay my expenses?“…have not we power to forbear working? Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also?” 1 Corinthians 9:6-8
Now, here comes his appeal to the law about his argument whether he or Barnabas or any of the other apostles have the authority to be full time in the ministry and be paid for the work that we do. Now, somebody will come back and say, “Well, that’s purely a human argument!” Alright, what is Paul’s appeal? He does not appeal to Christ, or to the sermon on the mount, or to Peter; he appeals, of all places, to Moses! And he says:For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? Or saith he it altogether for our sakes?…” 1 Corinthians 9:9-10
Now that is a very interesting statement. Does God really care that much about that animal you work with out there? And if you feed that animal before he goes to work, then work that animal and feed it after it works for you, if you’re sure the animal gets plenty to eat, what does God care whether or not you muzzle that animal while it treads up and down the corn? Paul’s’ answer is:
“… For our sakes, no doubt, this is written…” 1 Corinthians 9:10