Not Under Law, But Under Grace

[GracePeace]

I shared this in another site in response to a user who had raised an issue that was not directly pertinent to the topic, but, because it is an important question that a lot of people get confused about, and which does not really have entirely coherent responses, I thought I'd give it its own thread.

This user seemed to be confused, struggling to understand the concept "not under Law, but under Grace" (they never clarified their confusion, but it's what it seemed), trying to reconcile the fact that Paul says we're not under Law, and, yet, also says we still have to live righteously (can't covet, for instance, which is against the Law), and his "solution" was to define the doctrine that we are "not under Law", as "We're not under the traditions of the elders, but we are to observe elements of the Law of Moses".

The issue with this approach is that Paul says "Or do you not know, my brothers [Jewish Christians] (for I speak to those who know the Law [Gentiles had already been described as having not known the Law in Romans 2:14]) that the Law is binding on [a Jew] only as long as he lives?" (Ro 7:1) : Paul said that "the Law" he refers to, here, was binding on them as long as they lived, but Christ rejected that idea that "the traditions of the elders" (Mt 15) were binding, so a Jew who comes to faith wouldn't be "set free" from "the traditions of the elders", "halakhot", by dying.

No, it is Torah that is binding on the Jew as long as he lives--this Pharisaic tradition (and Paul had been a Pharisee) is also recorded in the Talmud, using a different text than Paul's to substantiate the argument, in Niddah 61b, which I learned from Rabbis Immanuel Schochet and Eli Cohen.

This idea ends up being confusing for many, because they fear this means someone might say it is OK to covet, etc, and, as a result, they try to redefine "the Law" that we're "not under" as something other than "Torah"; in reality, saying we're "not under Law" is not necessarily a statement against the content of the Law, as though they were not righteous requirements God wants fulfilled, it is a statement about the MEANS whereby men serve God/behave righteously. Under the Old Covenant, a Law was given whereby a man would demonstrate his own righteousness; under the New Covenant, the Spirit is given whereby God demonstrates His righteousness.

Now, in Romans 7:1-6, Paul proceeds to cite laws in the Torah (ie, "adultery") to demonstrate his argument that they are not under the Law by reason of their having died (ie, being that they are "in Christ", they have shared in Christ's death--"that the body of sin might be brought to nothing" (Ro 6:6)). Which "Law" are we "not under", then? Obviously, the Law of Moses, not rabbinic halakhot.

The Law says "it will be your righteousness" (Dt 6:25), and Paul says "not having a righteousness of my own from the Law" (Pp 3:9), but this does not mean God wants us to be unrighteous, or that we don't do anything, only that there is a new righteousness, and, along with that new righteousness, a new way of being righteous, a new MEANS.
Christ's Name is "God Is Our Righteousness"; God says, "I will put My Spirit in you and cause you to walk in My statutes". Paul calls this "serve in newness of the Spirit". "God's righteousness is revealed from faith to faith", so "each man must be fully convinced in his own mind". "Love believes all things", so, being that "God", Who is love, "is at work in us to will and to do", when God's love, working in us, creates a conviction ("faith working by love"), walking in that conviction is a revelation of God and God's righteousness, so that we are decreasing and He is increasing (ultimately, "God will be all in all", and "the knowledge of the glory of God will cover the earth as the waters cover the seas").

What Paul apparently means by "the righteous man shall live by faith" is the one who hears the Gospel with faith is no longer in the category of those who are cursed, which he defines as dead (ie, in sins and trespasses), whereas the one who believes has the promise of the Spirit through faith, which is the eternal life of God; but Paul mentions two stages to the Christian life (which, I think, correspond to the two parts of the singular command, "Believe in the Name of God's Son, AND love one another"), "having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?"

When you believe God, he says, that is "the Spirit" (having God's righteousness); if you, thereafter, seek perfection by the works of the Law, that is "the flesh" (having one's own righteousness).

Protestants get confused, here, I think, because they think this means "I don't have to do anything but believe"; the problem with this view is that a) in Galatians, Paul never says "faith in Christ alone", and b) he goes on, after delivering them from the slavery inherent in the Law (Gal 4:21-5:1), to give the description and dimensions of their freedom, which is that they are to serve one another by faith working through love.
So, they're NOT under Law, but they ARE under Grace--they are freed from slavery... to serve by the Spirit, just as the Jews were freed from slavery TO GO AND SERVE GOD (Ex 8:1).

"For we, through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness.; for in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love. ... For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not turn your freedom into an opportunity for the flesh, but, through love, serve one another. For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF." : they're not under the Law, but, now, they are to be serving (not their own selves, making an opportunity for their flesh) one another, through love, which "believes" (1 Co 13:7), or produces a conviction, which is what he says "each man is to be fully convinced in his own mind" (Ro 14:5), and the opposite is also true, "what ever is not of faith is sin" (Ro 14:23), because "God's righteousness is revealed from faith to faith" (Ro 1:17).
Christ's Name, indeed, is "God Is Our Righteousness" (Jer 23:6), and that is the lens through which to view and understand Romans, which is all about a man having "God's righteousness apart from the Law" (Ro 3:21), but we're also warned to "abide in Him" (1 Jn 2:28), and we know that to do that requires faith (which the Galatians fell short of when they submitted themselves again to a yoke of slavery)--faith in the Name of God's Son, AND loving one another (love produces faith, conviction) (1 Jn 3:23, 24). This is the meaning of "My righteous one will live by faith, but if [My righteous one] shrinks back, My soul has no pleasure in him... unto destruction..." (Heb 10:38-39).
Clearly, then, there are different ways of falling short of the grace of God : the Galatians ceased to be working in accord with the Spirit producing faith in their hearts, thus were no longer in grace, but, also, you may affirm you are not under Law, but, then, may walk contrary to your faith, whereby you are no longer abiding in Christ or are fallen from grace (which is also described as "severed from Christ", as also John 15:6 warns).

Nowhere in Galatians does Paul say, "just believe the Gospel", as if actually walking in faith had no bearing under Grace--so that, again, Paul's teaching coheres with that of James (Ja 2:20-24)--but he addresses two stages of Christianity, "beginning" and "being perfected" (Gal 3:3).

When Paul says "we... await the hope of righteousness", it must concern the personal enrichment (1 Co 13:3; Gal 6:4) and contentment (1 Ti 6:6) of the hope of glorifying God (Ro 5:2) being fulfilled when we serve others through love by which faith works (Mt 5:16), so that we will follow Paul's prescription of both "beginning" ("hearing with faith" (Gal 3:2)) and "being perfected" ("we through the Spirit by faith await the hope of righteousness", "faith working through love", "through love serve one another") by the Spirit.

Therefore, again, there should be no perceived danger of causing anyone to sin when we say that we are not under Law but under Grace--we fulfill the entire Law (Ro 13:8-10; Gal 5:14) if we really are under Grace.

 

[GracePeace]

One of the major objections to this doctrine that is raised by so-called "Torah Observant" Christians is Acts 21.

Quote17When we arrived in Jerusalem, the brothers welcomed us joyfully. 18The next day Paul went in with us to see James, and all the elders were present. 19Paul greeted them and recounted one by one the things that God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry.

20When they heard this, they glorified 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. 21But they are under the impression that you teach all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or observe our customs. 22What then should we do? They will certainly hear that you have come.

23Therefore do what we advise you. There are four men with us who have taken a vow. 24Take these men, purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so they can have their heads shaved. Then everyone will know that there is no truth to these rumors about you, but that you also live in obedience to the law.
...
26So the next day Paul took the men and purified himself along with them. Then he entered the temple to give notice of the date when their purification would be complete and the offering would be made for each of them.

So, how can Paul affirm (to James, et al) that he "keeps Torah" when we know that he explicitly teaches that he is not under the Law, but is under Grace, because he died, thus, the death he died he died both to sin and to the Law which are commands only for sinful humans?

Remember that Rahab was justified by lying--her lying was her act of faith--and, so, Paul lied.

Does Paul lie? Well, partially--he creates false impressions, for sure.

6But perceiving that one group were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, Paul began crying out in the Council, "Brethren, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees; I am on trial for the hope and resurrection of the dead!" 7As he said this, there occurred a dissension between the Pharisees and Sadducees, and the assembly was divided. 8For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, nor an angel, nor a spirit, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all. 9And there occurred a great uproar; and some of the scribes of the Pharisaic party stood up and began to argue heatedly, saying, "We find nothing wrong with this man; suppose a spirit or an angel has spoken to him?" 10And as a great dissension was developing, the commander was afraid Paul would be torn to pieces by them and ordered the troops to go down and take him away from them by force, and bring him into the barracks.

So, the Sanhedrin were trying to extract from Paul why he was in trouble.
Paul's answer is "I am a Pharisee."
Was that the whole truth, or merely a truth?
If you tell a partial truth, creating a false impression, that is a lie.
And what was Paul's intent?
To divide the court against itself.
The whole truth would've unified the court against him.
The whole truth was he was a Christian, so he was being falsely accused.
(Sin is self-service, hurting others--he hurt no one, and served God, with his false impression, so he did not sin, just as Rahab was congratulated for lying for God's sake.)

So, Paul is OK with lying to promote the Gospel, we could say, as long as it is partially true.

So, is it partially true that Paul walks orderly and keeps the Law?
Yes.
1. The Law, Itself, dictates Paul's freedom from It when he dies, so--being that Paul is in Christ, and dies together with Christ--Paul's lifestyle of not being under Law IS "orderly, according to the Law" (Acts 21:24), because it was "through the Law [Paul] died to the Law" (Gal 2:19).
2. Paul affirms that the righteous requirement of the Law is fulfilled in those who are under Grace, walking after the Spirit (Ro 8:4).
3. Paul continues to apply the Law, but in a new way (1 Co 9:8-14).

So, it is partially true, and he creates the false impression.

The question is why he would do this.
I think the answer is that he is in Jerusalem, and if he does not do so, if he confronts the Jewish believers, he will risk word getting out, misunderstandings developing, and, ultimately, the blowing of his cover among the diaspora Jews who are in town, and who will carry news back to the diaspora, so that he will not be able to continue his lifestyle of living as if under Law among Jew to win Jews though he himself is not under Law (1 Co 9).

Is it OK to leave the Jews with a false impression that they themselves are OK with keeping the Law when the New Covenant is that we are not under Law but under Grace?

Two examples :
1. Peter was convinced that only Jews could be saved, and that he had to keep the dietary Law (thus we know he still thought he was under Law), but, in the proper time, the Spirit of Truth led him into the truth of the Gospel via a vision, and he began to understand that he was not under the dietary restrictions and that Gentiles, not only Jews, could be saved.
Had God deserted Peter prior to this, just because his doctrine was incorrect?
No.

2. Romans 14 explains this : there is an ultimate truth, and there is a lesser truth of the conscience. An example of an ultimate truth is that we are, as Christians, free to eat meat, and the example of the lesser truth of the conscience, in this case, is that there may be a brother who is vegan, and believes he is not permitted to eat meat. Though the ultimate truth is that he may eat meat, it yields to the lesser truth of his conscience, so that he does not sully his conscience, but keeps it from being soiled, because, ultimately, he is held liable to his conscience, not to what ever the ultimate truth is, such that he destroys himself if he is persuaded by others or decides of his own volition to go against his conscience by doing something he doubts (is not persuaded by God's love) is correct.
Therefore, when Paul does not confront the Jews about the ultimate truth of the Gospel, but, so he doesn't make a fuss in a volatile situation, he goes ahead and creates a false impression that he is under Law, just like they are, he is not injuring them by leaving them with false information or instructions about the Gospel, he is merely leaving them to their consciences, trusting God will lead them into Truth in His timing, which is apparently permissible under the New Covenant.

The difference between the Galatian believer going under Law and the Jewish believers thinking they are to serve by the Law is that the Jew is in the process of shedding his past he is accustomed to, whereas the Gentile is not accustomed to the Law--for the Gentile, it is a distraction from Christ, whereas, for the Jew, their consciences were formed by the Law (so, for the Gentile to turn from Christ is to sully his conscience, but, for the Jew, he is not necessarily turning from Christ, because it's something he already knows), so, when God finds them, and they are under Law, they are permitted to persist (at least for a while--eventually, in the right time, God can bring them to the truth) in their Torah-formed and informed consciences.
It is different for a Gentile, who knows nothing about Torah, to be led astray from the simplicity of devotion to Christ, by the complications of the Torah. They already know what they need to know--Christ. When the Jew comes to Christ, he knows Torah and Christ, so he thinks he must do both of these things--eventually, God may lead him out of that. Gentiles also have their own misunderstandings, commitments to standards (eg, the vegan), which they are permitted/liable to keep until a time of God's choosing when they will be shown the truth. Until then, they are to keep their conscience clean, not soil their conscience.
About this, Paul says, "God has called us to live in peace... Only, as the Lord has assigned to each one, as God has called each, in this manner let him walk." : the Gentile believer cannot be forced to go under Law (and it would be force, not freedom), but, also, the Jewish believer cannot be forced to eat pork (though in time if God wills it will be revealed to them that this is actually fine), because God calls people to peace, and disturbing the conscience (by making them do something they merely believe is wrong, even if it is not actually wrong) would disturb their peace.
Therefore, there are two truths and standards--the ultimate truth and standard, and it yields to the lesser truth and standard of the person's personal conscience.

See how gracious God is?

So, to me, this is a satisfactory response to the Acts 21 objection, which, in turn, again, certifies that we are not under Torah.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

And those under grace (New Covenant believers) are now under the law of Christ with Jesus being the High Priest

Can you find "Law of Christ" in the New Testament?

 

[GracePeace]

And those under grace (New Covenant believers) are now under the law of Christ with Jesus being the High Priest

Can you find "Law of Christ" in the New Testament?

Being said to be "under Grace" and "within the Law of Christ" (1 Co 9:21) are one and the same : you can't be "under Grace" OR "within the Law of Christ", nor "under Grace" AND NOT "within the Law of Christ" (or vice versa). You can't be "within the Law of Christ" and NOT be "under Grace". How could you even submit to Christ's Law without Grace? Makes no sense.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Being said to be "under Grace" and "within the Law of Christ" (1 Co 9:21) are one and the same : you can't be "under Grace" OR "within the Law of Christ", nor "under Grace" AND NOT "within the Law of Christ" (or vice versa). You can't be "within the Law of Christ" and NOT be "under Grace". How could you even submit to Christ's Law without Grace? Makes no sense.

Did you not know that there are commandments in the New Testament?

And did you see God's list of "those that do these things shall not inherit the Kingdom"?

Many today think they can disobey the Lord Jesus and still be saved.

God's wrath comes upon the children of disobedience

Colossians 3:4-7
When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory.
Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:
For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience:
In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them.

What do you do with those claiming to be Christians who are still walking in sins like this?

Claim it's all good they are still saved?

Most churches teach these days that those living in sin are still saved and tell people they cannot lose their salvation leading people to believe it's OK top continue living in sin.

 

[GracePeace]

Did you not know that there are commandments in the New Testament?

And did you see God's list of "those that do these things shall not inherit the Kingdom"?

Many today think they can disobey the Lord Jesus and still be saved.

God's wrath comes upon the children of disobedience

Colossians 3:4-7
When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory.
Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:
For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience:
In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them.

What do you do with those claiming to be Christians who are still walking in sins like this?

Claim it's all good they are still saved?

Most churches teach these days that those living in sin are still saved and tell people they cannot lose their salvation leading people to believe it's OK top continue living in sin.

I don't know what your conception of being "under Grace" is; to me, it means you are "under the jurisdiction of Grace", meaning that the Spirit of Grace is in authority in your life, conforming you to God's good pleasure. It does not mean "everything you do is fine", or else Paul wouldn't have said you are "condemned", not justified, if you do not walk in faith (Ro 14:23).

I actually already expressed this in my post...

"For we, through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness.; for in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love. ... For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not turn your freedom into an opportunity for the flesh, but, through love, serve one another. For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF." : they're not under the Law, but, now, they are to be serving (not their own selves, making an opportunity for their flesh) one another, through love, which "believes" (1 Co 13:7), or produces a conviction, which is what he says "each man is to be fully convinced in his own mind" (Ro 14:5), and the opposite is also true, "what ever is not of faith is sin" (Ro 14:23), because "God's righteousness is revealed from faith to faith" (Ro 1:17).

... but I guess you didn't read my post before responding to it (Proverbs 18:13)?

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

conforming you to God's good pleasure

So God just magically does it all and we don't have to believe the Gospel

Romans 10:10
For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

According to this man must believe and confess unto salvation

Your claim is Romans 10:10 is in error?

... but I guess you didn't read my post

The baloney detector the Lord gave me makes me stop reading as soon as baloney is detected since there no reason to continue with so much baloney being espoused

It's called discernment, being led by the Holy Spirit according to God's Word so it's not anything you would understand.

 

[GracePeace]

So God just magically does it all and we don't have to believe the Gospel

Romans 10:10
For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

According to this man must believe and confess unto salvation

Your claim is Romans 10:10 is in error?

If you hadn't been a fool, and shamed yourself, but read before responding, you would've read that I don't believe any of the lies you are falsely accusing me of believing.
You haven't read what I have said, which contradicts your "baloney" false accusation.
LOL How can you accuse me of saying something you disagree with when you haven't even read what I wrote?

The baloney detector the Lord gave me makes me stop reading as soon as baloney is detected since there no reason to continue with so much baloney being espoused

It's called discernment, being led by the Holy Spirit according to God's Word so it's not anything you would understand.

Your "Lord" made you a fool, then, according to Proverbs 18:13.
Better get a better Lord.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Your "Lord" made you a fool, then, according to Proverbs 18:13.

No, He taught me long ago to not pay attention to false doctrine and so I don't.

Feel free to enjoy all the false doctrine you'd like.

 

[GracePeace]

No, He taught me long ago to not pay attention to false doctrine and so I don't.

Feel free to enjoy all the false doctrine you'd like.

OK feel free to get lost because you have nothing intelligent or helpful to say, just idiotic unthinking "discernment" that makes you into a fool, according to Proverbs 18:13.

Imagine being so idiotic--"I don't know what this is, I haven't read it, but I don't believe it, and I know it's FALSE."
The reason you "discern" that it is not good is that it didn't come from YOU.
You don't like anything that doesn't come from YOU. It's called the sin of pride.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

OK feel free to get lost because you have nothing intelligent or helpful to say, just idiotic unthinking "sensing" that makes you into a fool.

Whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. (Matthew 5:22)

 

[GracePeace]

Whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. (Matthew 5:22)

LOL What does He say about false accusation, like you've brought against me, claiming I say this and that false doctrine just so you can attack that straw man false representation? You want to attack, that's all. You're not interested in engaging in discussion.

 

[GracePeace]

Whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. (Matthew 5:22)

Proverbs 18:13 is going to hell fire, then, because Proverbs 18:13 called you a fool for responding to a matter before even hearing it.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Proverbs 18:13 is going to hell fire, then, because Proverbs 18:13 called you a fool for responding to a matter before even hearing it.

Well enjoy the rewards of teaching false doctrine and then calling people fools for calling you out.

 

[GracePeace]

Well enjoy the rewards of teaching false doctrine and then calling people fools for calling you out.

LOL You already admitted you didn't even read what you're calling "false doctrine".
You're arrogant and puffed up, and, according to Proverbs 18:13, you're a fool.
Either humble yourself, and engage in honest dialogue, or shut up and scram.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

LOL You already admitted you didn't even read what you're calling "false doctrine".
You're arrogant and puffed up, and, according to Proverbs 18:13, you're a fool.
Either humble yourself, and engage in honest dialogue, or shut up and scram.

I've encountered you and your false doctrine numerous times before

And the trend continues!

You have a right to your opinion as do I . . . . If you don't like what I post, please don't read my posts
and move on to read some other post. When the future gets here, we'll all see where everyone lands!

 

[GracePeace]

I've encountered you and your false doctrine numerous times before


And the trend continues!

You have a right to your opinion as do I . . . . If you don't like what I post, please don't read my posts
and move on to read some other post. When the future gets here, we'll all see where everyone lands!

You are not worth my time. Welcome to the ignore list!
Titus 3:10As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him,

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Titus 3:10As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him,

Those teaching others false doctrine are the ones that are divisive.

You are not worth my time. Welcome to the ignore list!

Well that's too bad. I could have helped you with all that fake stuff you are peddling but og well, suit yourself.

 

[GracePeace]

If @bigboyjohnson had read before responding (Proverbs 18:13), he would've known that I do not deny the idea that we are responsible for believing the Gospel, and that we are also responsible for walking in faith after believing the Gospel, and that it is the Grace of God that allows people to do this, and that people have the ability to reject Grace, which is what happens every time someone sins--that I basically hold the same position he does.

Instead of reading, he put his foot in his mouth. and "discerned" that I had false doctrine when I literally believe the same thing he does! He wants to be a leader, an umpire calling balls and strikes, but he is clueless, arrogant, rebellious, proud, deluded. He doesn't get along with anyone, because he thinks godliness consists in telling people they are wrong so he can imagine he is in a position above them. It is sickening. He can't get along with the OSAS crowd, and he can't even get along with a NOSAS like me! It is a sickness!