Colossians 2:14-16 - The Law That Was Against Us
- Thread starter BarneyFife
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
It most certainly is not amoral when God says "Don't do it." Did anyone accuse you of forcing your views on me? Why suggest such a thing? You're seizing upon single words like "impossible" and magnifying them to twist the meaning of my basic statements.
"Impossible to know"; "they have no knowledge"--not mutually exclusive as you depict them.
Again, thank you for your opinion, but your view, according to your own standard (if the Bible doesn't say it explicitly, it must be false), is little more than anecdote.
God seemed to think it was evil for humans, because He told them not to eat from the tree that would give them that knowledge.
Pointless semantics. Why would there need to be a literal transcript with the genuine article. Again you're siezing upon a single word and wringing it out in order to fashion a lame argument.
What I believe, in general, on the subject is not the same thing as the isolated statement you're critiquing.
And continue your mind-numbing usual practice of circular argument.
You cannot, in reality, prove or disprove a theory by stating 2 Bible texts that seem, on the surface, to contradict each other. What I said about "debunking" was hyperbole. I should have known better. You're not disappointing me at all. You're just proving that you would argue with a fence post if one could hear and talk. Again, hyperbole.
I don't know if I addressed all of your remarks here or not, but I guess it really doesn't matter since you're just grinding gears and doing your usual thing of parking in a thread and practically unintelligibly arguing someone into exhaustion. Notice, for example, that you've not once alluded to the real theme of the OP. You've just honed in on a few words and picked, and twisted, and minced all meaningful dialogue into oblivion. I've taken the liberty of going back through a substantial portion of your posting history to make sure I'm not falsely accusing you. What is it you're trying to prove or achieve here, Tong?
<<<It most certainly is not amoral when God says "Don't do it.">>>
That which I say is amoral is specific, that is, the eating or not eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Now, if to you, that is not amoral, so be it with you. But if such is not amoral, I wonder what could be amoral in your thinking.
<<<"Impossible to know"; "they have no knowledge"--not mutually exclusive as you depict them.>>>
I maintain that “impossible to know” does not convey the same meaning as “they have no knowledge”. If in your thinking, they are, so be it with you.
<<<Again, thank you for your opinion, but your view, according to your own standard (if the Bible doesn't say it explicitly, it must be false), is little more than anecdote.>>>
Firstly, never said that if the bible does not say something explicitly, that it must be false.
Secondly, if in your view, my view is little more than anecdotal, so be it with you.
<<<God seemed to think it was evil for humans, because He told them not to eat from the tree that would give them that knowledge.>>>
What is it you think could be that is evil for humans in having knowledge of good and evil?
<<<Pointless semantics. Why would there need to be a literal transcript with the genuine article. Again you're siezing upon a single word and wringing it out in order to fashion a lame argument.>>>
Not pointless sir. The point being is that you argued “God's law is a transcript of His character and thus exists in eternity.” That does not take away nor refute the fact, that laws are God’s creation, and that created things could not have existed from eternity but began only at the point of their creation. Please realize that while God’s created laws speaks of His character, the two are different. One difference relevant to this discussion is that the laws are created while His character is not.
<<<What is it you're trying to prove or achieve here, Tong?>>>
To take into consideration what you try to teach, and see if all that you say is supported in and are in keeping or not with scriptures. And in as much as you said a lot, at least 12 long posts, there is much to deal with, really. Those which I posted about are those which got my attention at the time of my reading.
How about you? What is it you’re trying to prove or achieve here barneyFife?
If time permits, I’ll try to touch all of your post (#1-12), if it pleases you.
Tong
R1389
Last edited:
Many Christians give lip service to the fact they live in the New Covenant.
The truth however is that because they fail to realise they are no longer under the law they are really still living in an Old Covenant reality.
Here are 37 scriptures that prove that Christians are not under the law!
Acts
The law is an unbearable yoke. (Acts 15:10)
Romans
The law reveals sin but cannot fix it. (Romans 3:20)
If the law worked then faith would be irrelevant. (Romans 4:14)
The law brings wrath upon those who follow it. (Romans 4:15)
The purpose of the law was to increase sin. (Romans 5:20)
Christians are not under the law. (Romans 6:14)
Christians have been delivered from the law. (Romans 7:1-6)
The law is good, perfect and holy but cannot help you be good, perfect or holy. (Romans 7:7-12)
The law which promises life only brings death through sin. (Romans 7:10)
The law makes you sinful beyond measure. (Romans 7:13)
The law is weak. (Romans 8:2-3)
1 Corinthians
The strength of sin is the law (1 Corinthians 15:56)
2 Corinthians
The law is a ministry of death. (2 Corinthians 3:7)
The law is a ministry of condemnation. (2 Corinthians 3:9)
The law has no glory at all in comparison with the New Covenant. (2 Corinthians 3:10)
The law is fading away. (2 Corinthians 3:11)
Anywhere the law is preached it produces a mind-hardening and a heart-hardening veil. (2 Corinthians 3:14-15)
Galatians
The law justifies nobody. (Galatians 2:16)
Christians are dead to the law. (Galatians 2:19)
The law frustrates grace. (Galatians 2:21)
To go back to the law after embracing faith is “stupid”. (Galatians 3:1)
The law curses all who practice it and fail to do it perfectly. (Galatians 3:10)
The law has nothing to do with faith. (Galatians 3:11-12)
The law was a curse that Christ redeemed us from. (Galatians 3:13)
The law functioned in God’s purpose as a temporary covenant from Moses till John the Baptist announced Christ. (Galatians 3:16 & 19, also see… Matthew 11:12-13, Luke 16:16)
If the law worked God would have used it to save us. (Galatians 3:21)
The law was our prison. (Galatians 3:23)
The law makes you a slave like Hagar. (Galatians 4:24)
Ephesians
Christ has abolished the law which was a wall of hostility (Ephesians 2:15)
Philippians
Paul considered everything the law gained him as “skybalon” which is Greek for “poop”. (Philippians 3:4-8)
1 Timothy
The law is only good if used in the right context. (1 Timothy 1:8) (see next verse for the context)
It was made for the unrighteous but not for the righteous. (1 Timothy 1:9-10)
Hebrews
The law is weak, useless and makes nothing perfect. (Hebrews 7:18-19)
God has found fault with it and created a better covenant, enacted on better promises. (Hebrews 8:7-8)
It is obsolete, growing old and ready to vanish. (Hebrews 8:13)
It is only a shadow of good things to come and will never make someone perfect. (Hebrews 10:1)
Well there you have it… 37 scriptures that make a very convincing arguement.
—-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
I didn’t mean to post this twice, BUT.....I think it fits in here nicely...
Many Christians give lip service to the fact they live in the New Covenant.
The truth however is that because they fail to realise they are no longer under the law they are really still living in an Old Covenant reality.
Here are 37 scriptures that prove that Christians are not under the law!
Acts
The law is an unbearable yoke. (Acts 15:10)
Romans
The law reveals sin but cannot fix it. (Romans 3:20)
If the law worked then faith would be irrelevant. (Romans 4:14)
The law brings wrath upon those who follow it. (Romans 4:15)
The purpose of the law was to increase sin. (Romans 5:20)
Christians are not under the law. (Romans 6:14)
Christians have been delivered from the law. (Romans 7:1-6)
The law is good, perfect and holy but cannot help you be good, perfect or holy. (Romans 7:7-12)
The law which promises life only brings death through sin. (Romans 7:10)
The law makes you sinful beyond measure. (Romans 7:13)
The law is weak. (Romans 8:2-3)
1 Corinthians
The strength of sin is the law (1 Corinthians 15:56)
2 Corinthians
The law is a ministry of death. (2 Corinthians 3:7)
The law is a ministry of condemnation. (2 Corinthians 3:9)
The law has no glory at all in comparison with the New Covenant. (2 Corinthians 3:10)
The law is fading away. (2 Corinthians 3:11)
Anywhere the law is preached it produces a mind-hardening and a heart-hardening veil. (2 Corinthians 3:14-15)
Galatians
The law justifies nobody. (Galatians 2:16)
Christians are dead to the law. (Galatians 2:19)
The law frustrates grace. (Galatians 2:21)
To go back to the law after embracing faith is “stupid”. (Galatians 3:1)
The law curses all who practice it and fail to do it perfectly. (Galatians 3:10)
The law has nothing to do with faith. (Galatians 3:11-12)
The law was a curse that Christ redeemed us from. (Galatians 3:13)
The law functioned in God’s purpose as a temporary covenant from Moses till John the Baptist announced Christ. (Galatians 3:16 & 19, also see… Matthew 11:12-13, Luke 16:16)
If the law worked God would have used it to save us. (Galatians 3:21)
The law was our prison. (Galatians 3:23)
The law makes you a slave like Hagar. (Galatians 4:24)
Ephesians
Christ has abolished the law which was a wall of hostility (Ephesians 2:15)
Philippians
Paul considered everything the law gained him as “skybalon” which is Greek for “poop”. (Philippians 3:4-8)
1 Timothy
The law is only good if used in the right context. (1 Timothy 1:8) (see next verse for the context)
It was made for the unrighteous but not for the righteous. (1 Timothy 1:9-10)
Hebrews
The law is weak, useless and makes nothing perfect. (Hebrews 7:18-19)
God has found fault with it and created a better covenant, enacted on better promises. (Hebrews 8:7-8)
It is obsolete, growing old and ready to vanish. (Hebrews 8:13)
It is only a shadow of good things to come and will never make someone perfect. (Hebrews 10:1)
Well there you have it… 37 scriptures that make a very convincing arguement.
Perhaps. But on my part, I understand the ten commandments as being part of the covenant that God made with the children of Israel in the Exodus, whose mediator was Moses. They are, I would say, part of the covenant laws. Now the covenant laws comprise of many laws which are moral laws, ceremonial laws, social laws, food laws, purity laws, laws on sacrifices and offerings, other ordinances, judgments,...
In my reading of scriptures, there is not any blending of sort, but that they are all part of the old covenant between God and the children of Israel. And concerning this covenant, scriptures says that this had been replaced by a new covenant, a better one at that. Now, in that God said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. And that was so, some 2000 years ago.
So, needless to say, the present time now is of the new covenant. That the people of God are in and under a new covenant with God. It is but proper for the Christian to know of this new covenant, a better covenant, I would have to say.
Concerning the ten commandments. Now, laws are among the creation of God. And no creation is of an eternal nature. Only God is of an eternal nature, a truly eternal nature, I would have to say.
If one will read the ten commandments in the Exodus scriptures, he will easily understand that they were given by God to the children of Israel in covenant, His covenant which He commanded them to perform, the Ten Commandments (Deut. 4:13).
One must consider what is written elsewhere in scriptures as well, concerning the other statutes, judgments, ordinances.
These are not coming from Moses. They came from God. They are commandments of God for Israel to perform. They are not commandments of Moses.
Exod. 21:1 Now these are the judgments which you shall set before them:.....
Lev. 1:2 “Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them:.....
The ten commandments, together with all the other commandments of God that He gave to Moses for the children of Israel to perform, were all given in covenant. They are together and collectively, which scriptures call, the Law of Moses, or simply, the Law.
Tong
R1390
Thank you for your participation and your views on the law and covenants.
We definitely disagree on the importance and purpose of the ten commandments. Just 50 years ago, no one would make the claim you are making about them in any church. At that time (and for the 4000 years prior) no one believed that the ten commandments were just another part of the old covenant laws. Except maybe for a handful of forward-thinking academic workers. The title of this thread includes a reference to Colossians, chapter 2, where the "handwriting of ordinances" was nailed to the cross. In modern/post-modern evangelical circles this "handwriting of ordinances" is considered to include the ten commandments. Recently, I asked my father (who went to a Southern Baptist church and Sunday School virtually every weekend of his youth--a decade or more) if he had ever heard of the ten commandments being nailed to the cross. He told me without hesitation that he had never heard of such a ridiculous notion.
The point of contention at that time was not over whether the ten commandments were in effect or not, but whether the Sabbath was Sunday or Saturday, and it was perfectly understood by approximately 99% of Christians in the world that Sunday was indeed the New Covenant Christian Sabbath and that Saturday was the Old Covenant Jewish Sabbath. My grandmother (his mother) would not allow any unnecessary labor on her property on Sunday. She was very strict about this. The devil hates the ten commandments because they illustrate the character of God. He has done everything he possibly could to bring it into disfavor with modern Christendom and he has succeeded gloriously. The Sabbath he especially hates because as stated in Hebrews 4, it represents the rest of Heaven which the saints will enjoy throughout ceaseless ages of eternity. He knows he will never partake of this rest, so it is greatly despised by him. He has also succeeded in causing Christians to minimalize the glory of, and yearning for, Heaven in favor of the comforts of this world, especially in developed nations.
This is not a teaching as much as it is a testimony, so you may pick it apart all you like, but it cannot be gainsaid, in my view. It is also my partial interpretation of the texts in Colossians 2 and Hebrews 4, and there is not a thing you can say that will change it. If you do not approve, then, as you say, so be it for you.
It is no less specific with me. It is exactly as you say, and to obey or not to obey God is not amoral. Actually, nothing is amoral, because God has a perfect will for everything--everything.
I do not say that they have exactly the same meaning, but that they are not mutually exclusive, as you imply or suggest. I'm not at all sure we can find common ground on this subject. Perhaps we had best drop it.
You at least implied as much. Consider it hyperbole if you like. Your opinion; your view; just seems like extraneous verbosity. Doubtless you will disagree--so be it for you.
You're asking the question that is answered by your quote--God said don't eat which entails discovering the knowledge.
Perhaps you are not appreciating fully the concept of law. Also you are technicalizing an abstract. The transcript could also be called an illustration or an image or an expression. The existence of something without expression is meaningless.
Simply what is referred to in the title of the thread that I started. This is not a verbal volleyball game for me. If you think I'm implying that it is for you: So be it for you--if the shoe fits, wear it.
Please, by all means, and take your time.
Interesting. Nevertheless, such does not take away the truth of the testimony of scriptures that the Other commandments in addition to the ten commandments are from God, were made by God, and were given by God in covenant to the children of Israel. (See post #188)
<<<At this point we can note several distinctions in the two laws. They had different authors, were written on different material, were placed in different locations and had totally different content.>>>
See post #188. There are not two laws and there are not two authors. There is only the Law of Moses whose author is God. And supposing that there were different materials used where the Commandments were written and different locations were they were kept, that does not make for two laws and two authors.
<<<It is interesting to note that the curses and judgments of this law spelled out penalties for transgression which were totally missing from the Ten Commandments. For this reason, the ceremonial law was considered to be a law which was “against” them.>>>
It seems that you take the commandments, except for the ten commandments, as being all ceremonial laws. I definitely disagree. Consider for example what is written in Exodus 21. They aren’t ceremonial laws.
So, for clarity’s sake, please tell us what you consider are ceremonial laws in the law of Moses by giving a few of them. Preferably those which comes with curses and judgment. Let’s see how they could be ceremonial.
And also, since you have two sets of Laws, one being the Ten Commandments and the other that which you call Ceremonial Law, there is need for clarification as to which of the two is which you take to be referred to in some passages. Let me cite a few and tell us which is referred to, the Ten commandments or Ceremonial law. That should be easy for you.
Matthew 5:17-18
Matthew 22:36-40
Luke 10:26
John 1:17
Acts 15:5
Romans 4:15
Romans 5:13
Romans 7:6
Romans 7:7
Romans 7:12
I hope to be able to address the rest of your post properly after this clarification.
Tong
R1393
Disagree. it looks like another point upon which we will find no common ground. The scriptural eveidence given is enough to satisfy me.
I do not. But is a common practice in my church to describe them this way, for the sake of brevity. Among the law of Moses were ceremonial, civil, health, etc.
Mostly those concerning the Sanctuary service. Sorry, but I simply don't have time to generate a list.
Matthew 5:17-18 the scriptures
Matthew 22:36-40 moral
Luke 10:26 the scriptures
John 1:17 the OT but mainly the torah
Acts 15:5 ceremonial
Romans 4:15 moral
Romans 5:13until the time of the torah/moses
Romans 7:6 moral
Romans 7:7 moral
Romans 7:12 OT and then moral
The word "law" has many different meanings in the writings of Paul. His understanding of the Old Testament far exceeded any other of the Gospel which is why he many things which were hard to be understood (2 Peter 3:16).
Yes we do have a different take regarding the ten commandments written about in Exodus 20.We definitely disagree on the importance and purpose of the ten commandments. Just 50 years ago, no one would make the claim you are making about them in any church. At that time (and for the 4000 years prior) no one believed that the ten commandments were just another part of the old covenant laws. Except maybe for a handful of forward-thinking academic workers. The title of this thread includes a reference to Colossians, chapter 2, where the "handwriting of ordinances" was nailed to the cross. In modern/post-modern evangelical circles this "handwriting of ordinances" is considered to include the ten commandments. Recently, I asked my father (who went to a Southern Baptist church and Sunday School virtually every weekend of his youth--a decade or more) if he had ever heard of the ten commandments being nailed to the cross. He told me without hesitation that he had never heard of such a ridiculous notion.
The point of contention at that time was not over whether the ten commandments were in effect or not, but whether the Sabbath was Sunday or Saturday, and it was perfectly understood by approximately 99% of Christians in the world that Sunday was indeed the New Covenant Christian Sabbath and that Saturday was the Old Covenant Jewish Sabbath. My grandmother (his mother) would not allow any unnecessary labor on her property on Sunday. She was very strict about this. The devil hates the ten commandments because they illustrate the character of God. He has done everything he possibly could to bring it into disfavor with modern Christendom and he has succeeded gloriously. The Sabbath he especially hates because as stated in Hebrews 4, it represents the rest of Heaven which the saints will enjoy throughout ceaseless ages of eternity. He knows he will never partake of this rest, so it is greatly despised by him. He has also succeeded in causing Christians to minimalize the glory of, and yearning for, Heaven in favor of the comforts of this world, especially in developed nations.
This is not a teaching as much as it is a testimony, so you may pick it apart all you like, but it cannot be gainsaid, in my view. It is also my partial interpretation of the texts in Colossians 2 and Hebrews 4, and there is not a thing you can say that will change it. If you do not approve, then, as you say, so be it for you.
Of course one can turn to other things other than the words of God in scriptures, like what your father said to you and perhaps on writings of the past according to some historians, which may or may not be accurate accounts. But on my part, I only turn to the words of God in scriptures, which taught me that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. It also taught me that the Holy Scriptures, are which that are able to make me wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. And I could be certain that all that can be read are trustworthy and true.
I noticed that you seem to know a lot about the devil, what he hates, does, knows, and success. If what you say is what it really is about the devil, I think you have an amazing ability.
Tong
R1394
Unfortunately, we have to live in this world, and we're bound to be influenced by things other than the Bible. But I admire the thought as you express it.
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
However:
You gotta know your enemy.
And, when you get right down to it, he's our only enemy.
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Absolute must watch...
Likewise.
Thanks for the clarification.
<<<The word "law" has many different meanings in the writings of Paul.>>>
Perhaps. But context helps us to get to the meaning.
<<< His understanding of the Old Testament far exceeded any other of the Gospel which is why he many things which were hard to be understood (2 Peter 3:16).>>>
The context of 2 Peter 3:16 makes such to not apply as to what Paul refers to “law” in his writings. The context where Paul use “law” get us to what he refers to by it. And his use of the word “law” normally refers to the covenant law, the Law of Moses, which comprise all commandments and precepts that which God gave to the children of Israel through Moses. The law, of which he is considered a teacher of, being a Pharisee. The covenant law which the Jews are supposed to keep and live by. And that would not obviously exclude the ten commandments.
Let me now consider some of the passages here. To be clear, I understand that when you use “moral”, you refer to the Ten commandments, and “ceremonial” to ceremonial, health, civil, etc.,
<<< Matthew 22:36-40 moral>>>
The law referred to in v. 36 could not refer to the moral law = ten commandments, since what Jesus said in answer (v.37) isn’t among the ten. Even the commandment spoken of by Jesus in v.38. Where are these 2 great commandments found which Jesus said in response to the question in v.36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?”. They are found among the other commandments that God gave in covenant to the children of Israel through Moses, which you take as the Ceremonial Law.
<<<John 1:17 the OT but mainly the torah>>>
Perhaps you need to clarify what you refer to by OT as distinct to the Torah that I may understand what you mean.
In the verse, it says “For the law was given through Moses....”. The “law” clearly referred to here is that which God gave through Moses. And that could not be nor include any that was not given through him. John’s use of the word “law” strongly suggest that John was specifically referring to commandments and precepts given by God specifically to Moses and not to someone else, nor does he refer to narratives of events revealed to Moses. Else, John would have perhaps used “Scriptures” or perhaps “the law and the prophets” or “Torah” or “Tanakh”. If one go over the Scriptures, one will be able to find out what law God had given through Moses. And that is no less the covenant laws consisting of the ten commandments (found in Exodus 20) and the judgments, and other precepts involving ceremonial and civil matters (read mainly in Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy).
<<<Romans 4:15 moral>>>
I am surprised that you take “law” there to refer to the ten commandments. For that take on the law there, somehow go against your very own argument that there was nothing in the Ten-Commandment law that could be defined as “contrary” to Paul and the church to whom he was writing. Your take of law there would have v.15 as rendering the ten commandments as brings about wrath. Sure sounds “contrary” to Paul and the church.
When I consider the context in v.14, being integral to v.15, it makes the law mentioned in v.14 to be the same law in v.15. Now, that really would make a mess of verse 14, if the “law” is taken as the ten commandments.
I take the “law” there as referring to the Law of Moses or the covenant law, which I take as comprising the ten commandments and all the other commandments and precepts that God gave in covenant to the children of Israel through Moses.
<<<Romans 5:13until the time of the torah/moses>>>
I don’t quite understand. So, what does the “law” in that verse refer to? Is it the ten commandments Law or the Ceremonial law?
<<<Romans 7:6 moral>>>
That would render v.6 as that the Christian had been delivered from the ten commandments. That sounds to not make much sense to me. Perhaps you can tell me the sense of that.
Tong
R1396
Last edited:
Frankly, I am at a loss here. I answered the question of "law" pertaining to all 10 of the texts you provided, but you only responded to 5 of them. So I don't know whether you just listed the ones you disagree with, or whether you only considered half of them.
Nevertheless, I will comment on what we have here, including your remarks on 2 Peter 3:16.
Honestly, I don't know what to think of all this. I know they say swords sharpen swords or something like that, but it seems like we can virtually agree upon nothing. I even consulted several well-respected, scholarly commentaries after my conclusions to see if I might possibly be on track and I had no discrepancies.
?????
Nevertheless, I will comment on what we have here, including your remarks on 2 Peter 3:16.
Actually the context of verse 16 in verses 14 and 17 indicates the opposite of what you claim here (seek spotlessness: avoid lawlessness).
In fact, Romans 13:9 and Galatians 5:14 suggest that the 2 great commandments are a summation of the ten commandment moral code, with the first four describing our duty to God, and the last 6 our duty to our fellow man.
The truth is, when Christ used the word "law" He rarely meant the ten commandments only, unless he specified such. To Christ, all of His Father's words were law. He did not think of the law and the prophets as being two separate entities, but as a figure of speech used to denote every word that proceeded from the mouth of God. It was as if to say the law began with Moses, but did not end with him. I know this sounds like conjecture, but I am of a mind that all of the slicing and dicing of Scripture, law, covenants, and dispensations that goes on in Christian circles only complicates something that is so beautifully simple and essential to the Gospel itself--living by every word...
It has to be the ten commandment moral code that points out sin, in general. Context is not the last word in all scriptural interpretation, contrary to popular belief. The first rule of hermeneutics is to take the text as it reads, unless a symbolic or other meaning is indicated. For the new covenant believer, especially, it is the ten commandment law primarily that points out sin.
It's unimportant to nail down the meaning of the word "law" in this text. It is speaking of the time between Adam and the time that Moses was given the law or when he began working on the Torah, whichever came first. The 2nd use of the word "law" in the text most likely means the moral law (which I neglected to point out).
This text is difficult because of the comparisan to the civil law in verses 2 and 3, but it has to mean condemnation under the moral law, because what other law could the new covenant Christian need to be delivered from? This in no way excuses us from seeking to live morally, which the moral law obviously teaches. It is not an easy passage to interpret. This is why the book of Romans receives such attention and conflict among students/scholars. The caution of 2 Peter 3:16 is well-warranted here.
Honestly, I don't know what to think of all this. I know they say swords sharpen swords or something like that, but it seems like we can virtually agree upon nothing. I even consulted several well-respected, scholarly commentaries after my conclusions to see if I might possibly be on track and I had no discrepancies.
?????
When scriptures says that the old covenant was replaced with a new covenant, so that the old is made obsolete, that means it is the end of the covenant laws which includes all commandments and precepts that God gave in covenant to Israel. It means further that the people of God, as scriptures says, are no longer under the law that is, they are no longer under the covenant with God, that covenant made at the time when God took the children of Israel out from Egypt whose mediator was Moses. When a covenant is replaced, it is made obsolete, and what is made obsolete is not hard to understand what becomes of it and of what it contains. All of it is no more. To say that some part of it will and still remain to be effective runs contrary to what it means to be made obsolete or replaced.
Let me be clear. When I say that the ten commandments given in covenant to Israel was abolished or are no more, it is only the written code that was made of no effect and done away with, but not the principle and spirit embodied in the commandments. That goes as well with the other covenant commandments and precepts.
Now, here’s what we have. In place of the old covenant, now is a new covenant whose mediator is Jesus Christ. A new covenant said to be made not according to the former covenant that God made with Israel (Heb.8:9). Now, this is what is in the new covenant:
For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.” (Heb.8:10-12)
We can see that in the new covenant, God’s laws are no longer given as a code of letters written in stone or with ink as it was in the old covenant, but will be put in the minds and written in the hearts.
Now, I have this question to the Christian, what laws were written in your mind and heart?
So now regarding your argument, yes, Paul mentioned one of the ten commandments when he wrote to the church in Ephesus. But if you will notice, Paul wrote of it in Eph.6:2, not because the ten old covenant commandments were not done away with along with the entire old covenant or that they are still under the law of the ten commandments. That does not follow. He quoted the commandment right after verse 1, which suggest that he wanted to stress the importance of children obeying their parents. I take notice how Paul have written of it in this epistle and compare that to when this commandment was given by God back then to the Israelites, which is in a very much different manner, tone and force, and no less, as a covenant commandment. And the Christian have to bear in mind, that the new covenant laws, unlike the old covenant laws, are not written in letters engraved in stone or impressed in ink on paper, that serves as a code to be read, taught and learned, but are found in his mind and heart.
Tong
R1397
Ok, so they're gone. So, then, it's okay to worship other gods, bow down to idols, take the lord's name in vain, forget the Sabbath, dishonor parents, lie, steal, murder, commit adultery and covet, right?
Absolute balderdash and doubletalk. No offense but this is nonsense. It's mysticism. The only laws God had when he foretold the new covenant were the written ones. He wanted to write the law on their hearts in Deuteronomy 5:29:
O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!
Nobody peddled this stuff 50 years ago. None of the reformers believed it or wrote about it. n. Are we especially enlightened now? I'm not buying it for a minute. And it positively blows my mind that people my age and older are buying it. They're being set up by the devil. He hates the idea of man reflecting God's character, so he's whitewashing everything. Don't be fooled, Tong. It's not going to stand.
I'll leave you with this:
Revelation 14
6And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, 7Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.
8And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.
9And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, 10The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: 11And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. 12Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
6And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, 7Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.
8And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.
9And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, 10The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: 11And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. 12Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
The law was made for bad people, are you a bad people??. That is the justification of those who have no love, if you do not keep the law you must be a bad person,, doesnt work that way, if you put yourself under the law it is because you are a bad person and need them to set you straight,
1Ti_1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
The righteous are those in Christ that have put on His righteousness,, for those whom "claim". and it is only a claim, to keep the law is the evidence that they are not in Christ and have not put on His righteousness.
Disobedient even to death.
Similar threads
