Understanding the Law vs. Grace

[Behold]

The curse of the law is death -

Death came upon Humanity, not by Law, but by :

Romans 5:12

""""""Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin"""""

 

[gadar]

Death came upon Humanity, not by Law, but by :

Romans 5:12

""""""Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin"""""

Read what I wrote. I did not write that death came by the law. You need to explain how that can be since the law is holy, righteous, and good, per Rom 7:12, thus the law cannot be a curse. Death came via the CURSE/RESULT of the law which defines what constitutes as sin in God's eyes. Transgression of the law results in sin, which results in the curse of the law, which results in death. That should not be hard to understand. Per Rom 5:12 death came through one man who sinned. It certainly does not say that death came through the law. Rather, Adam sinned by transgressing God's law/command, resulting in his sin, resulting in the curse due to the requirements of the law, which resulted in death.
I also noticed that you didn't reply to the rest of my comment regarding law and grace but no sweat as that's your prerogative.

 

[Enoch111]

It is embracing a system of righteousness that he has displayed as coming through grace and forgiveness, and not by perfect obedience to his righteous standard. We accept him as our righteous standard, while at the same time embracing the idea of forgiveness of sin.

Why have you ignored the reality of imputed righteousness? That is not " a system of righteousness" but the righteousness of God and Christ imputed to the one who repents and believes.

The Law (as stated in the Ten Commandments) is God's righteous moral and spiritual standard. It has carried over into the Law of Christ. The difference now is that what was written on tablets of stone in now written on hearts and minds by the Holy Spirit. And it is the Holy Spirit who enables the child of God to obey the Law of Christ.

It seems that too many Christians still do not understand justification by grace through faith and imputed righteousness. Yet this is a FUNDAMENTAL Gospel truth. This does not mean that God does not require practical righteousness of His children. Quite the opposite. We are required to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world.

 

[amigo de christo]

Why have you ignored the reality of imputed righteousness? That is not " a system of righteousness" but the righteousness of God and Christ imputed to the one who repents and believes.

The Law (as stated in the Ten Commandments) is God's righteous moral and spiritual standard. It has carried over into the Law of Christ. The difference now is that what was written on tablets of stone in now written on hearts and minds by the Holy Spirit. And it is the Holy Spirit who enables the child of God to obey the Law of Christ.

It seems that too many Christians still do not understand justification by grace through faith and imputed righteousness. Yet this is a FUNDAMENTAL Gospel truth. This does not mean that God does not require practical righteousness of His children. Quite the opposite. We are required to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world.

 

[amigo de christo]

 

[gadar]

Indeed, the focus for far too long has been on positional righteousness almost to the exclusion of personal, practical righteousness. Yet, even positional righteousness is misunderstood as "imputed" righteousness. The notion of imputed righteousness is based on texts such as Rom 4:5-8. Most ignore the fact that v.7-8 refer to David's act of repentance that occurred BEFORE his sin was covered. In this Psalm, David recounts that he "wasted away" when he kept silent about his sin and God's hand was heavy upon him. It was not until he confessed and repented of his sin and sought forgiveness did he then experience the blessing of God. Thus Jesus' righteousness is not automatically imputed to us when we sin. We like David, first need to confess and renounce our sin, seeking God's forgiveness and when we do so, we receive the righteousness of Christ. The opposite scenario is to sin to our flesh's desires thinking that we already have the imputed righteousness of Christ and thereby fail to confess our sin and seek God's forgiveness.

 

[amigo de christo]

 

[Randy Kluth]

Why have you ignored the reality of imputed righteousness? That is not " a system of righteousness" but the righteousness of God and Christ imputed to the one who repents and believes.

I have not ignored it. It isn't inconsistent with my ideas, as I see it. You see imputed righteousness as negating our own righteousness, and that would not be correct, in my opinion. What is essential is that a *perfect model of righteousness* be imputed to us, without ignoring the righteousness we display in ourselves. In doing some of the righteousness, Christ's perfect record covers for the flaws in our performance so that we obtain rights to a perfect Kingdom.

The righteousness that we do display is being done *through Christ* such that it actually is derived from Christ in partnership with our own obedience. As such, it presents Christ's righteousness through us, imputing to us not only his righteousness but his perfect record, as well.

The Law (as stated in the Ten Commandments) is God's righteous moral and spiritual standard. It has carried over into the Law of Christ. The difference now is that what was written on tablets of stone in now written on hearts and minds by the Holy Spirit. And it is the Holy Spirit who enables the child of God to obey the Law of Christ.

It seems that too many Christians still do not understand justification by grace through faith and imputed righteousness. Yet this is a FUNDAMENTAL Gospel truth. This does not mean that God does not require practical righteousness of His children. Quite the opposite. We are required to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world.

And so, you're upholding what I'm saying by admitting that we do righteousness ourselves. That is not inconsistent with imputation of Christ's blameless record, which is applied to us when we choose his way over our ways.

 

[gadar]

I'm an Evangelical Christian, and would disagree with you. While it's true what Paul said, that sin is defined for Israel by breaking the Law of Moses, it does not define sin for Christians today. We are in no sense *under the Law of Moses.*

The Law serves today only as an example of how Israel was disqualified, as all men are, from Eternal Life as long as they are under the Law or unable to appeal to Christ for forgiveness. Precisely because we are no longer under the Law today we cannot be condemned by the Law.

Condemnation remains for men who live in sin even though they are not under the Law because sin exists apart from the Law as much as it did under the Law. Sin is defined not just by the Law of Moses, but also by the eternal Law of God, existing both before and after the Law of Moses.

Today Christians are under the mercy of Christ who has the authority to give us Eternal Life despite our sinful condition. The Law of Moses is not only helpless to condemn us while we are under the mercy of Christ, but it no longer remains in effect any longer, since Israel irretrievably broke that covenant.

Those who wish to believe they are still under the Law are obligated to argue with God over whether Israel destroyed that covenant. And even if God restored that covenant, it would be inconsistent of God to do so, since He has now supplied something greater than the Law.

Those who were under the Law were obligated to keep 613 requirements, including temple, priest, and sacrifice laws. The temple doesn't exist, nor does the priesthood. And a better sacrifice has been made.

The problem though with your explanation is that why then does the Apostle John write to believers in 1 Jn 3:4 that sin is transgression of the law. Same thing with the Apostle Paul who wrote in Rom 3:20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin. The inclusive use of "we" obviously refers to Paul himself and other believers. Thus your claim that the law does not apply to Christians is negated by both John and Paul.

 

[Taken]

Understanding the Law vs. Grace​

OP ^

WHAT is a LAW?
* A revealing of WHAT is acceptable Called POSITIVE LAW.
* A revealing of WHAT is NOT acceptable Called NEGATIVE LAW.
* Consequences… VIOLATIONS of NEGATIVE LAWS,
Called in ancient terms: CURSE Laws.
Called in modern terms: PENAL Laws.

WHAT is a STAUTE?
* A STATUTE is a LAW, that IS WRITTEN and PUBLISHED.

WHAT is COMMON LAW?
* A verbal LAW (that may be written, published or NOT, and may or may not have Negative consequences for Violation.

WHO is a LAW FOR? The Ignorant, Unruly, Stubborn, etc.

Scripturally, spiritually God delivered HIS LAWS: via His Servants, (holy angels, men God Appointed) via His COMMANDS…TO BE revealed, verbally, written, copied, taught, distributed TO all men OF this world.

WHAT DOES FULFILLED the LAW mean?
A LAW which REQUIRES a specific ACTION, and a man COMPLETES that ACTION….
THAT specific LAW is become FULFILLED.
THAT specific LAW is become MOOT, in application to THAT specific man WHO fulfilled THAT specific LAW.

WHAT DOES “Under the Law” mean?
Under the Law MEANS, a particular Law applies to a particular man, and CONTINUES applying to a particular man, UNTIL THAT particular man FULFILLS THE LAW.

When God Commands a man TO BELIEVE IN God….and a particular man BELIEVES IN God….THAT particular man HAS FULFILLED THAT LAW.

When God Commands a man TO BELIEVE IN the one Gods Sent (JESUS)….and a particular man BELIEVES IN Jesus…THAT particular man HAS FULFILLED THAT Law.

ONCE a man has FULFILLED a Particular LAW Commanded BY God….BY GODS GRACE…that particular man….IS FORGIVEN for ALL the DAYS of that mans LIFE SPAN, that man lived having NOT fulfilled Gods Law.

CONTINUED….the CAVEAT…

 

[Taken]

CONTINUED….the CAVEAT…

Belief and Acts of men, day to day CAN CHANGE. Because of ignorance, because of Influence, because of hardships, because of impatience, because of fear, because of force, etc.

WHY? A single individual man, IS the LEAST Powerful ALONE, AGAINST the Power OF:
Demonic angels, Governing powers, Armies, Trained Animals, Gangs, Elders, etc.

Gods SOLUTION, via His OFFERING…
1) Hear, Learn, ABOUT Gods OFFERING, Choose YOU, to ACCEPT His OFFERING…or not.

2) Gods OFFERING, is that, that an individual man BE GIVEN, the SUPREME POWER OF GOD IN THAT INDIVIDUAL man FOR that individuals ABILITY to STAND AGAINST….greater powers (than an individual mans powers) of demonic, governing, gang, armies, etc.

3) What is Gods POWER called? CHRIST.

4) What is Gods POWER IN A MAN Called?
IN CHRIST.

5) What is the ReSULT of CHRIST “IN” an individual man?
* Comfort DURING any ATTACK of demonic angels, governing powerful men, gangs, armies, hardships, etc.
* Assurance of their soul Salvation, their spirit Quickened, their body raised in glory, Forever Alive wIth God.

ALL body’s LIFE (blood) of human men MUST DIE (God requires it). Gen 9:5

HOW mens body’s DIE, is endless; accidents, old age, diseases, killing, suicides, murders, etc.

Assurance of soul salvation and quickened spirit and body raised in glory and forever alive With God….IS ONLY by, through, of Christ (Gods Power) Jesus (Gods Word of Truth).

Hoping for soul salvation and quickened spirit and body raised in glory and forever alive With God….IS a man HOPING by his own power, strength, stamina….he alone can STAND Against, (not be convinced to JOIN with) demonic angels, corrupt powerful governing men, etc.

Gods GRACE….is First He reveals the Dilemma, then OFFERS a solution, then Reveals How a man can Accept His OFFER, and then FORGIVES a man for all the days of that mans life he did not hear, know or act, accepting Gods Offer.


Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Behold]

You need to explain how that can be since the law is holy, righteous, and good, per Rom 7:12, thus the law cannot be a curse.

Ok.

"the power of sin is the law"".

"Jesus came to redeem us from the CURSE of THE LAW".

Why is the law a curse regarding a person?
Because it requires righteousness from you, and you dont have any because "all have sinned".
So, the LAW defines you as a SINNER = "the curse of the Law".
And what is worse, is that "the power of sin is the law"" and that means that when you try to keep the law, the dominion of the law empowers your flesh to be strong and stronger, and that is why you can't stop "sinning and confessing".

See that 'curse"?

"Jesus came to redeems us from the CURSE of the Law".

How?

"Jesus is the END OF THE LAW.....= for Righteousness", and the born again ... "are not under the Law, but under GRACE".

 

[Behold]

first need to confess and renounce our sin, seeking God's forgiveness and when we do so, we receive the righteousness of Christ.

You dont "receive God's righteousness by confessing sin".

You receive God's Righteousness when He gives it to you because you have "believed in Jesus"..

"FAITH" is counted as righteousness"..... "justification by Faith."

 

[Randy Kluth]

The problem though with your explanation is that why then does the Apostle John write to believers in 1 Jn 3:4 that sin is transgression of the law. Same thing with the Apostle Paul who wrote in Rom 3:20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin. The inclusive use of "we" obviously refers to Paul himself and other believers. Thus your claim that the law does not apply to Christians is negated by both John and Paul.

Yes, this is where the false idea that the Law is still in effect originates, from this bad interpretation of these verses. As with all biblical interpretation, the statements need to be viewed in context. And in context, both John and Paul were addressing a time when the Law had only recently still been in effect and when Jews continued to practice the Law, even though it had been nullified by their nation's own apostate behavior.

Since Israel had entirely broken the covenant by their own separation from God the covenant had been irretrievably broken. This had happened before in Israel's history, immediately before their captivities, and it was now happening again. Christ's death on the cross was the ultimate symbol that the covenant had been broken. The author of Hebrews indicated that the opening of the veil of the temple meant that the temple law itself had come to an end.

Heb 10.19 Therefore, brothers and sisters, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, 20 by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body,

Since Jewish believers had only recently entered into this "new and living way," the Law had only recently still been convicting Israel of sin and ultimately condemning them for not keeping the provisions of the Law. This is no way indicated that they were stating the continuing efficacy of the Law, unless it was as a passe testimony to the truths of God made evident in the recent past. Israel's history under the Law had been a testimony to the truths of God as now fulfilled in Christ's death and atonement for sin.

1 Cor 10.6 Now these things occurred as examples to keep us from setting our hearts on evil things as they did.

There is abundant evidence that the Law was representative of a covenant that has now passed away in favor of the New Covenant of Christ. One passage that particularly creates confusion for some people is Jesus's statement in his Sermon on the Mount...

Matt 5.17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Please note that Jesus was speaking to Israelites *while they were still under the Law of Moses!* This is often ignored when treating this passage. However, at the time Jesus found it critical to declare the viability of the Law and the importance of adhering to it prior to his death. It was Israel's basis of standing with God, in a time prior to the availability of eternal atonement for sin.

Often it is pointed out that the applicability of the Law appears to be given relevance "until heaven and earth disappear." However, Jesus was merely indicating that the authority of the Law was equal to creation itself such that what the Law taught would remain in effect as long as human sin remained relevant.

Sin had to be mitigated, and prior to his death for sin Israel had to mitigate the problem of sin before that took place. In fact, what Jesus was saying was that the present applicability of the Law as well as its "fulfillment" would be relevant forever, since sin could never find its way into the Kingdom of heaven.

 

[Behold]

There is abundant evidence that the Law was representative of a covenant that has now passed away in favor of the New Covenant of Christ.

The Cross of Christ is the "evidence" that the Law came by moses, but Grace and Truth came by Jesus The Christ.

"Christ is the end of the Law for Righteousness to all who believe" settles the case in court.

The blood and death of Jesus is the "new Covenant", and the "New Testament".

The Righteousness of God is not found in the law or commandments.. Its found as "the Gift of Salvation" and "the Gift of Righteousness" that you received if you are born again.
If a person is just water baptized and religious, then that is not the same.

Jesus said..>"you must be born again"..... He didnt say, "you must be water baptized and religious", tho billions who claim to be "christians" will argue that "born again BY water" is their Salvation.

However, God KNOWS that we are "born again by His Holy Spirit".

Make certain you "KNOW" this also, reader.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The Cross of Christ is the "evidence" that the Law came by moses, but Grace and Truth came by Jesus The Christ.

"Christ is the end of the Law for Righteousness to all who believe" settles the case in court.

The blood and death of Jesus is the "new Covenant", and the "New Testament".

The Righteousness of God is not found in the law or commandments.. Its found as "the Gift of Salvation" and "the Gift of Righteousness" that you received if you are born again.

I would better explain this as "eternal righteousness for sinful Man" is not found in the Law of Moses. A temporary form of righteousness did exist under the Law as a temporary mitigation in Israel against the effects of sin. Israel could not possibly live in covenant with God unless somehow sin was dealt with and mitigated.

And so, under the temporary provisions of the Law Israel could be viewed as "righteous," although this was temporary and could never lead to eternal life. As long as the Sin Nature remained and not dealt with legally, righteousness would ever be viewed as insufficient for attaining to Eternal Life.

On the other hand, I think you're absolutely correct if you mean that Eternal Righteousness could not come through the commands of the Law, since they came with only temporary provisions in dealing with sin. Christ had to come and offer his own record of righteousness, which is spotless and blameless. Without this a single sin would keep us out of heaven forever.

If a person is just water baptized and religious, then that is not the same.

Jesus said..>"you must be born again"..... He didnt say, "you must be water baptized and religious", tho billions who claim to be "christians" will argue that "born again BY water" is their Salvation.

However, God KNOWS that we are "born again by His Holy Spirit".

Make certain you "KNOW" this also, reader.

I agree. Water Baptism is a mere external, physical act. We must do more than display our choice to follow Christ--we must actually receive him and then follow him. It is receiving the righteousness of Christ on the inside, spiritually, that enables us to make use of his spotless record, and thus enable us to enter into heaven forever. Anything short of walking with Christ sidesteps the means of Eternal Life.

John 14.6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

 

[Behold]

. As long as the Sin Nature remained and not dealt with legally, righteousness would ever be viewed as insufficient for attaining to Eternal Life.

Christ had to come and offer his own record of righteousness, which is spotless and blameless. Without this a single sin would keep us out of heaven forever.

The law and commandments actually show us our sin nature.
Paul said "i had not known sin (mine) were it not for the Law".
"all have sinned" is the law and commandments defining us..

Also, the blood of animals was accepted as a covering, a temporary solution., in the old Testament.

So why then does this happen? = "Jesus is the one time ETERNAL sacrifice for sin".

"where sin abounds, Grace more abounds".

Jesus's blood atonement, is for the world......"For God so loved the world, that He gave" .. The Cross.
That is everyone..... "the world".
So, if the blood of Jesus, shed 2000 yrs ago, saves people tomorrow and for the last 2000 yrs...., then obviously it has no issue keeping us:
= "now being made free from sin".

Sin is no match for the Blood of Jesus.
Why?
Because Jesus is GOD... That is God on the Cross... That's God's Blood.....atonement.

 

[gadar]

Yes, this is where the false idea that the Law is still in effect originates, from this bad interpretation of these verses. As with all biblical interpretation, the statements need to be viewed in context. And in context, both John and Paul were addressing a time when the Law had only recently still be in effect and when Jews continued to practice the Law, even though it had been nullified by their nation's own apostate behavior.

Since Israel had entirely broken the covenant by their own separation from God the covenant had been irretrievably broken. This had happened before in Israel's history, immediately before their captivities, and it was now happening again. Christ's death on the cross was the ultimate symbol that the covenant had been broken. The author of Hebrews indicated that the opening of the veil of the temple meant that the temple law itself had come to an end.

Heb 10.19 Therefore, brothers and sisters, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, 20 by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body,

Since Jewish believers had only recently entered into this "new and living way," the Law had only recently still been convicting Israel of sin and ultimately condemning them for not keeping the provisions of the Law. This is no way indicated that they were stating the continuing efficacy of the Law, unless it was as a passe testimony to the truths of God made evident in the recent past. Israel's history under the Law had been a testimony to the truths of God as now fulfilled in Christ's death and atonement for sin.

1 Cor 10.6 Now these things occurred as examples to keep us from setting our hearts on evil things as they did.

There is abundant evidence that the Law was representative of a covenant that has now passed away in favor of the New Covenant of Christ. One passage that particularly creates confusion for some people is Jesus's statement in his Sermon on the Mount...

Matt 5.17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Please note that Jesus was speaking to Israelites *while they were still under the Law of Moses!* This is often ignored when treating this passage. However, at the time Jesus found it critical to declare the viability of the Law and the importance of adhering to it prior to his death. It was Israel's basis of standing with God, in a time prior to the availability of eternal atonement for sin.

Often it is pointed out that the applicability of the Law appears to be given relevance "until heaven and earth disappear." However, Jesus was merely indicating that the authority of the Law was equal to creation itself such that what the Law taught would remain in effect as long as human sin remained relevant.

Sin had to be mitigated, and prior to his death for sin Israel had to mitigate the problem of sin before that took place. In fact, what Jesus was saying was that the present applicability of the Law as well as its "fulfillment" would be relevant forever, since sin could never find its way into the Kingdom of heaven.

Are you a dispensationalist/hyperdispensationalist? Just curious as that would account for your insistence is distinguishing between Jew and Gentile.
Firstly, contrary to your assertion, the Old Covenant has not passed away. That notion contradicts Heb 8:13 which states "By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear." This verse states that the old has not yet disappeared but is instead obsolete/outdated. Thus the old covenant still exists much like an antique car is still in existence but is obsolete/outdated compared to a new, modern car. The OT foreshadows the NT but that doesn't mean it no longer applies as it is still in existence. The OT points the way to Jesus so it remains the foundation of the NT. One cannot properly understand the NT without proper knowledge of the OT.

Secondly, although in Matt 5 where Jesus addressed his Jewish audience, he made the clear statement that the Law will not disappear until heaven and earth pass away. Question: Have heaven and earth passed away yet? Thus despite his audience, his words have universal application since last time I checked, heaven and earth still exist. Thus the law still exists. So in this case, it makes no difference whether Jesus addressed his words to Jew or Gentile. The fact is the earth and heavens are still here - and so is the Law.

Thirdly, you wrote: "...Jesus found it critical to declare the viability of the Law and the importance of adhering to it prior to his death. It was Israel's basis of standing with God, in a time prior to the availability of eternal atonement for sin." If I understand you correctly, you believe that the law is the basis for right-standing with God for the Jew/Israelite prior to Jesus' atonement via the cross. How can that be when Heb 10:4 states: For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. Nevertheless, even if I were to agree with your view that the Israelites had to remain under the law in order to maintain their relationship with God prior to Jesus' death, then presumably the law no longer applies to the Jews after Jesus' death correct? After all, we both know what the blood of bulls and goats could not do, Jesus' atonement, once and for all takes away sins for both Jew and Gentile. Given this, then explain to me why Acts 21:20 states: When they heard this, they praised God. Then they said to Paul: “You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews have believed, and all of them are zealous for the law. This verse states that THOUSANDS of Jews BELIEVED, yet ALL were still ZEALOUS for the Law for which THEY PRAISED GOD.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Are you a dispensationalist/hyperdispensationalist? Just curious as that would account for your insistence is distinguishing between Jew and Gentile.

No, I'm not any kind of Dispensationalist, although I have many friends in that category. I do agree with them on the "Hope of Israel," as spelled out in the ancient Prophets as well as in NT Scriptures. I do not view Israel as an "elite nation" among other Christian nations, but I do find it essential that God save the nation Israel by bringing it to a place of conversion to Christ. Other Christian nations will have the same hope of returning to genuine Christian practice, and so find their nation saved from certain destruction or extinction.

Finding a difference between Jew and Gentile is not much different than finding a difference between Black and White, or a Frenchman and an Englishman. These categories were created by God and are sustained in the book of Revelation, as well as elsewhere. God's promise to Abraham was to "many nations," and not to a metaphorical nation including all nations.

Firstly, contrary to your assertion, the Old Covenant has not passed away.

That is clearly not orthodox Christian doctrine. Nearly all doctrinally-orthodox communions, that I know of, consider the New Testament as having displaced, or fulfilled, the Old Testament. The Law is neither applicable to Christians nor to Jews nor to pagans.

However, after the time of the Law had passed, it has remained an eternal testimony to the fact that men, apart from Christ, are disqualified from eternal fellowship with God in His Kingdom. The Law's testimony may be eternal. But the applicability of the Law is not. That is orthodox Christian doctrine.

That notion contradicts Heb 8:13 which states "By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear." This verse states that the old has not yet disappeared but is instead obsolete/outdated.

This is a common error, and I understand how it could be viewed this way. However, the normal explanation for this is that the author of Hebrews is not speaking of the applicability of the Law, but rather, of the infrastructure of the Law, or of the practice of the Law, by unbelieving Jews. They continued to worship at the temple even after Jesus declared that he was the true temple, and the Jews rejected and killed Jesus.

The temple worship, therefore, continued for another 40 years after Jesus' death, even as Jesus had predicted, "all these things will take place in this generation," referring to the destruction of the temple. But Christians had already begun to proclaim salvation in Jesus' name only, as opposed to any need for national salvation through temple worship. I'm here referring to "salvation" both as the Jews meant it, as national survival, and as Christians meant it, as obtaining eternal life.

Secondly, although in Matt 5 where Jesus addressed his Jewish audience, he made the clear statement that the Law will not disappear until heaven and earth pass away. Question: Have heaven and earth passed away yet? Thus despite his audience, his words have universal application since last time I checked, heaven and earth still exist. Thus the law still exists. So in this case, it makes no difference whether Jesus addressed his words to Jew or Gentile. The fact is the earth and heavens are still here - and so is the Law.

I've already answered this, but you may not have heard. Jesus was speaking of the current applicability of the Law *in his time,* while *the Law was still in effect.* The extension of the applicability of the Law, "until heaven and earth disappear," had to do both with OT times and NT times, the OT time because it was still in effect, and the NT time only because it remained as a *testimony* to the need for Christian salvation.

That is, this is not talking about the Law continuing to be in effect until the end of the universe. Rather, it is talking about the *testimony* of the Law continuing to be in effect until the end of the universe, including both the time when the Law was still in effect, and afterwards, when it testified to the fact that only Christ could save, rendering the Law irretrievably broken and helpless to save Israel.

Again, Jesus' words are clear--he is speaking of a time when the Law was still in effect, and of the time after it was no longer in effect because he mentioned both the need to "do it" and later, the need to recognize its testimony as a *fulfillment.* There can be no question that Jesus fulfilled the Law. As such, the only continuing value of the Law is to testify to the fact that it is helpless to save and that only Christ can save.

Thirdly, you wrote: "...Jesus found it critical to declare the viability of the Law and the importance of adhering to it prior to his death. It was Israel's basis of standing with God, in a time prior to the availability of eternal atonement for sin." If I understand you correctly, you believe that the law is the basis for right-standing with God for the Jew/Israelite prior to Jesus' atonement via the cross. How can that be when Heb 10:4 states: For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

There is no contradiction here if you understand me correctly. Yes, the Law enabled Israel to have good standing with God as long as they obeyed the Law properly, replete with the means of temporary provisions for sin. It was a temporary fix for a problem that only Christ could permanently heal.

The verse you refer to above is the frequent "shorthand" biblical authors use when writing to those familiar with them and with things they had explained better privately. What the author is really saying is what I'm saying, that the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sins *permanently.* They were just a temporary provision, and the letter's readers will likely have understood that clearly. It is a little more difficult for us to understand abbreviated statements like that living 2000 years after the fact!

Nevertheless, even if I were to agree with your view that the Israelites had to remain under the law in order to maintain their relationship with God prior to Jesus' death, then presumably the law no longer applies to the Jews after Jesus' death correct? After all, we both know what the blood of bulls and goats could not do, Jesus' atonement, once and for all takes away sins for both Jew and Gentile. Given this, then explain to me why Acts 21:20 states: When they heard this, they praised God. Then they said to Paul: “You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews have believed, and all of them are zealous for the law. This verse states that THOUSANDS of Jews BELIEVED, yet ALL were still ZEALOUS for the Law for which THEY PRAISED GOD.

Yes, these converted Jews had remained anxious to keep the Law only because they thought that repentance meant a return to faithful obedience to the Law. After all, that is the message Jews had received for generations, the true repentance requires abandonment of idolatry and a return to faithful obedience to the Law.

Paul's many letters were often designed to correct this notion. Unbelieving Jews were to be left to observe the Law in their ignorance--at least they worshiped God. But believers were *not* to follow the Law except in circumstances where it would be a public insult to Jews in their sacred places. To return to the Law would be to fail to recognize Israel's failure under the Law and Christ's substitute for the Law's inability to save forever.

Paul argued that sometimes it's good for the Christian to become "like them to win them." Therefore, Paul observed the Law at times, not because there was any value before God, but only because there was value in acting respectful among various ethnicities while trying to testify to them of the love of Christ.

 

[Jim B]

The problem though with your explanation is that why then does the Apostle John write to believers in 1 Jn 3:4 that sin is transgression of the law. Same thing with the Apostle Paul who wrote in Rom 3:20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin. The inclusive use of "we" obviously refers to Paul himself and other believers. Thus your claim that the law does not apply to Christians is negated by both John and Paul.

Paul wrote this in Romans 6:14, " For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace."

And this in Romans 7:4-6, "So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. For when we were in the realm of the flesh, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code."

There are other examples, but these verses clearly show that Christians are not under the law. If a Christian puts themself back under the law, then s/he is denying Christ and becoming a slave again.