Colossians 2:14-16 - The Law That Was Against Us

[Randy Kluth]

You told me that already. And it does not make faith to be work. Yes, faith produces deeds, but that does not make faith to be work.

Are you inventing your own language? Last time I looked, "Deeds" meant "Works!"

James 2.14 What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds/works?

Check out those in bold font in the quote box, which says “to be righteous”. So you seem to be reading wrongly what I was saying. For what I said is not that God made them righteous, but that God wanted for them to be righteous.

In either case you're wrong. God said they were righteous. Faith made Abraham and Israel both righteous when they obeyed the Law. It's just that whenever they produced righteousness, they continued to reveal their sin nature as well. It was not a righteousness, therefore, that could impart eternal life, but only temporal blessings in life.

Circumcision was a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham. A seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had. Clearly, it’s about the righteousness of faith, apart from works. We know Abraham. He was a man of faith. We know that his observing and keeping what God had commanded him to do, he did in faith. God gave him commandments, not to make him righteous, for he was already righteous in the sight of God, bit not on account of works, but of faith.

Abraham was righteous both because of his faith and also because his faith produced obedience, or good works by obeying God's word. It was never enough to just believe. The kind of faith that justifies is one that truly repents and calls upon God for help through forgiveness. God's word applies to such a man by grace so that he can continue to hear and obey God's instructions.

James 2.21 Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar?

Now, God’s commandments are righteous and good. So it goes without saying that the works Abraham did were righteous and good. So that, his works showed men that he was righteous. So that, when one does the works of the commandments of God, he is said and seen as righteous, which is a righteousness of works, different from the righteousness of faith.

Both belief for forgiveness and belief for obedience represent the "righteousness of faith." Neither one obtains eternal life. But faith for forgiveness does obtain justification, through repentance. This is not, however, eternal justification--just temporary justification.

When Paul is talking about the Works of the Law, once again, he is speaking in abbreviated language, describing, in context, the works Israel was doing *apart from faith.* By faith they should've been obtaining life and blessing. But they had turned from the way, and had received cursing instead, along with death.

They were not justified by works under the Law because they failed to obtain lasting justification under that system. The nation failed. It was an indication that all men fail, including men of faith. Not even men of faith can be eternally justified because the elements of the Law will always condemn them.

Remember, the commandments came after he was justified by God. So obviously, they have nothing at all to do with his justification, that was by faith, and that was apart from works. And obviously then, the commandments were not for that purpose, but for another.

No, Paul was just stating that faith must precede the Law so that obedience can be viewed as both righteousness and justification. Without faith obedience to the Law is artificial and worthless. Even worse, it misrepresents the whole purpose of the Law, which was to make righteous. It was never intended, however, to provide eternal life because the Law itself prevented Man from having that until Christ provided eternal atonement. Gal 3.21-22.

In the case of Israel, the difference is that, they (collectively) had no faith as that of Abraham...

Israel cannot be judged strictly by their Wilderness experience. Did some of them apply faith later on? Of course! Abraham was not the only man of faith!

And I am not at all saying that. What I am saying is to emphasize that righteousness is on account of faith. Yes there is another righteousness, that is the righteousness of works, apart from faith. But such is not that which pleases God.

Now you're saying what I've been saying from the beginning!

Then you don’t understand what I am saying. Try to understand what I said “Whether the law or the works of the law, are done in faith or not, does not make of the law to be of faith.”

Of course it does! If Israel obeyed God by faith, then their works were done in faith. Paul was speaking of the Law and Works as abbreviations, as I've been saying. They represented Israel at a particular time in history when they completely failed to operate in them by faith. He was not saying that they weren't meant to be operated by faith! They were!

 

[Randy Kluth]

I will only say here, the law was not given to put an obstacle to Israel’s salvation, but to the contrary, was given to bring them to Christ, the Savior. I don’t see the law as an obstacle at all.

Then you're going to have to explain what this means?

Gal 3.22 But Scripture has locked up everything under the control of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.
23 Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. 24 So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. 25 Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

 

[Tong2020]

Are you inventing your own language? Last time I looked, "Deeds" meant "Works!"

James 2.14 What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds/works?

That does not make faith to be works.

Tong2020 said: ↑
Check out those in bold font in the quote box, which says “to be righteous”. So you seem to be reading wrongly what I was saying. For what I said is not that God made them righteous, but that God wanted for them to be righteous.

In either case you're wrong. God said they were righteous. Faith made Abraham and Israel both righteous when they obeyed the Law. It's just that whenever they produced righteousness, they continued to reveal their sin nature as well. It was not a righteousness, therefore, that could impart eternal life, but only temporal blessings in life.

God wanting for them to be righteous does not make them righteous. I hope you can understand what I am saying.

<<<Faith made Abraham and Israel both righteous when they obeyed the Law.>>>

That’s right. It is faith that is the matter, not works. Take away faith and every deed is nothing in the eyes of God, though men sees it to be righteous. So, if you are talking about righteousness in the sight of man, yes works make the man righteous in that sense. Such righteousness does not account to salvation.

Tong2020 said: ↑
Circumcision was a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham. A seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had. Clearly, it’s about the righteousness of faith, apart from works. We know Abraham. He was a man of faith. We know that his observing and keeping what God had commanded him to do, he did in faith. God gave him commandments, not to make him righteous, for he was already righteous in the sight of God, but not on account of works, but of faith.

Abraham was righteous both because of his faith and also because his faith produced obedience, or good works by obeying God's word. It was never enough to just believe. The kind of faith that justifies is one that truly repents and calls upon God for help through forgiveness. God's word applies to such a man by grace so that he can continue to hear and obey God's instructions.

James 2.21 Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar?

<<<Abraham was righteous both because of his faith and also because his faith produced obedience, or good works by obeying God's word. >>>

Yes. But I must point out that it’s all because of faith.

<<<It was never enough to just believe. >>>

Enough for what?

Tong2020 said: ↑
Now, God’s commandments are righteous and good. So it goes without saying that the works Abraham did were righteous and good. So that, his works showed men that he was righteous. So that, when one does the works of the commandments of God, he is said and seen as righteous, which is a righteousness of works, different from the righteousness of faith.

Both belief for forgiveness and belief for obedience represent the "righteousness of faith." Neither one obtains eternal life. But faith for forgiveness does obtain justification, through repentance. This is not, however, eternal justification--just temporary justification.

When Paul is talking about the Works of the Law, once again, he is speaking in abbreviated language, describing, in context, the works Israel was doing *apart from faith.* By faith they should've been obtaining life and blessing. But they had turned from the way, and had received cursing instead, along with death.

They were not justified by works under the Law because they failed to obtain lasting justification under that system. The nation failed. It was an indication that all men fail, including men of faith. Not even men of faith can be eternally justified because the elements of the Law will always condemn them.

The righteousness of faith is not a result of works. It is on account of faith that God imputed or accounted righteousness to Abraham, justifying him, which amounts to the forgiveness of his sins. If you will just make some observation as to the occasion when Abraham was justified by God, you will find out that it was just all about faith in God. Nothing at all about forgiveness nor obedience.

If one will not look into that or will ignore that or does not take that into account, I think they will not really come to the understanding how one is justified by God, not that of Abraham, nor that of any man, even the Christians.

Tong2020 said: ↑
Remember, the commandments came after he was justified by God. So obviously, they have nothing at all to do with his justification, that was by faith, and that was apart from works. And obviously then, the commandments were not for that purpose, but for another.

No, Paul was just stating that faith must precede the Law so that obedience can be viewed as both righteousness and justification. Without faith obedience to the Law is artificial and worthless. Even worse, it misrepresents the whole purpose of the Law, which was to make righteous. It was never intended, however, to provide eternal life because the Law itself prevented Man from having that until Christ provided eternal atonement. Gal 3.21-22.

Without faith, no one will be justified, not anything, not the law, not good works.

The purpose of the law is explicit in scriptures. We can all read that in Gal.3. It was not for justification. Paul was very clear on that. With reference to the justification of Abraham, he clearly told us how one is justified, that is, by faith.

It seems to me that we do also have a different understanding and appreciation of what is atonement. It’s not justification, nor is it forgiveness.

Tong2020 said: ↑
In the case of Israel, the difference is that, they (collectively) had no faith as that of Abraham...

Israel cannot be judged strictly by their Wilderness experience. Did some of them apply faith later on? Of course! Abraham was not the only man of faith!

Of course. For Israel are not only those at the wilderness.

Individually, there may have been some who were of faith as that of Abraham. Now this is what Paul said in Rom.4, “For the promise that he would be the heir of the world was not to Abraham or to his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. Paul also said to the Galatians, those who are of faith are blessed with believing Abraham. I have already told you what this blessedness is in one of my posts.

Tong2020 said: ↑
And I am not at all saying that. What I am saying is to emphasize that righteousness is on account of faith. Yes there is another righteousness, that is the righteousness of works, apart from faith. But such is not that which pleases God.

Now you're saying what I've been saying from the beginning!

What? Righteousness of works? I know that’s the righteousness that you are saying. That’s why I clarified, by pointing out that the righteousness of faith, is what is that which was imputed by God to Abraham, that is apart from works. And that while there is such a thing as righteousness of works, such does not justify one before God. One might say, as I think you are, that if works were done in faith, then such works justify the man before God. And I disagree. For faith, apart from works, is what God takes into account and justifies the man.

Tong2020 said: ↑
Then you don’t understand what I am saying. Try to understand what I said “Whether the law or the works of the law, are done in faith or not, does not make of the law to be of faith.”

Of course it does! If Israel obeyed God by faith, then their works were done in faith. Paul was speaking of the Law and Works as abbreviations, as I've been saying. They represented Israel at a particular time in history when they completely failed to operate in them by faith. He was not saying that they weren't meant to be operated by faith! They were!

<<<If Israel obeyed God by faith, then their works were done in faith. >>>

Yes. But it does not make faith to be works. That does not change the fact that God justifies on account of faith and not works. If Israel had obeyed God by faith, Israel would have been justified by God, but not on account of works, but of faith. But Israel evidently had not done that.

Tong
R1825

 

[Tong2020]

Tong2020 said: ↑
I will only say here, the law was not given to put an obstacle to Israel’s salvation, but to the contrary, was given to bring them to Christ, the Savior. I don’t see the law as an obstacle at all.

Then you're going to have to explain what this means?

Gal 3.22 But Scripture has locked up everything under the control of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.
23 Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. 24 So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. 25 Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

What do you want for me to explain there? That Scriptures has locked up everything under the control of sin? Well, the Scriptures is not the law and the law is not the Scriptures. Some perhaps take scriptures there as to mean the law. But Paul could had easily then just said law instead of scriptures. The scriptures there is the word of God, taken in general and collectively.

Regarding the law, I think the purpose as to why it was added and what it served is clear there. It was to hold Israel under guard and bring them to Christ, Him sent by the Father, to testify of the Father and reveal and make Him known to them. So, that they might be justified, as Abraham was justified, by faith in Him.

Tong
R1826

 

[Brakelite]

Remember, the commandments came after he was justified by God.

Interesting observation.
I would like to offer a further perspective.
Israel, whilst in Egypt, were in bondage... Slavery to very hard taskmasters. Then came the Passover... The type to Calvary. When the destroying angel visited those homes, he didn't look at the characters and lifestyles of those living within... All he was looking for was the blood on the door posts and lintels... In the form of a cross.
After their race across the desert to the Red Sea, their fight and flight from sin and bondage, their faith exercised and their personal witness to the power of God in tender loving care for them, then, and only then, did God give them His law... His commandments. Israel were saved by grace, then given a glimpse of the righteousness already imputed through being justified by faith, and the righteousness that God would have imparted to them had they remained faithful.
Such is the same order of things for every individual person who was saved by grace from bondage to sin through faith in the blood of Christ, and then to whom God reveals His commandments. Those Commandments are promises. Read Exodus 20. How does it start? I am the Lord thy God who brought you out... That same Lord and God says today to His born again children...I am the Lord thy God who brought you out...
And He then calls us to walk in His ways, according to His Commandments... And He promises that He also provides all the power to do so. The issue with the old covenant wasn't with God, it was with Israel's promise to obey. God doesn't ask us to promise anything in response to His covenant with us. He simply asks us to believe.
There is nothing wrong with the law of God. He doesn't expect us to do the impossible. Righteousness does not come by our striving and promising to obey... Do better... Strengthen our wills... Grind our teeth until we succeed. Righteousness comes by faith. Those Commandments are promises. All we have to do is believe them.

 

[Tong2020]

Interesting observation.
I would like to offer a further perspective.
Israel, whilst in Egypt, were in bondage... Slavery to very hard taskmasters. Then came the Passover... The type to Calvary. When the destroying angel visited those homes, he didn't look at the characters and lifestyles of those living within... All he was looking for was the blood on the door posts and lintels... In the form of a cross.
After their race across the desert to the Red Sea, their fight and flight from sin and bondage, their faith exercised and their personal witness to the power of God in tender loving care for them, then, and only then, did God give them His law... His commandments. Israel were saved by grace, then given a glimpse of the righteousness already imputed through being justified by faith, and the righteousness that God would have imparted to them had they remained faithful.
Such is the same order of things for every individual person who was saved by grace from bondage to sin through faith in the blood of Christ, and then to whom God reveals His commandments. Those Commandments are promises. Read Exodus 20. How does it start? I am the Lord thy God who brought you out... That same Lord and God says today to His born again children...I am the Lord thy God who brought you out...
And He then calls us to walk in His ways, according to His Commandments... And He promises that He also provides all the power to do so. The issue with the old covenant wasn't with God, it was with Israel's promise to obey. God doesn't ask us to promise anything in response to His covenant with us. He simply asks us to believe.
There is nothing wrong with the law of God. He doesn't expect us to do the impossible. Righteousness does not come by our striving and promising to obey... Do better... Strengthen our wills... Grind our teeth until we succeed. Righteousness comes by faith. Those Commandments are promises. All we have to do is believe them.

Interesting perspective.

<<<Those Commandments are promises. Read Exodus 20.>>>

The ten commandments were not promises.

Here’s a perspective.

The law is but a shadow of the reality of the salvation of God ~ Christ. The reality had come long time ago, in the person of Jesus, the Christ, the Son of God, the Savior.

Here’s a thought.

Now that we have scriptures speaking about the reality for which the law was a shadow of, we ought to look on the reality not the shadow. We ought to live in the reality not in the shadow.

Tong
R1827

 

[Ferris Bueller]

Interesting perspective.

<<<Those Commandments are promises. Read Exodus 20.>>>

The ten commandments were not promises.

Here’s a perspective.

The law is but a shadow of the reality of the salvation of God ~ Christ. The reality had come long time ago, in the person of Jesus, the Christ, the Son of God, the Savior.

Here’s a thought.

Now that we have scriptures speaking about the reality for which the law was a shadow of, we ought to look on the reality not the shadow. We ought to live in the reality not in the shadow.

Tong
R1827

Well, at least one of them came with a promise....

2“Honor your father and mother”—which is the first commandment with a promise— 3“so that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth.” Ephesians 6:2-3
​

Some laws were foreshadows of the realities to be unveiled, and some are just what you're supposed to do!

 

[Tong2020]

Well, at least one of them came with a promise....

2“Honor your father and mother”—which is the first commandment with a promise— 3“so that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth.” Ephesians 6:2-3
​

Some laws were foreshadows of the realities to be unveiled, and some are just what you're supposed to do!

That’s right, that one came with a promise.

Were the ten commandments shadows of realities to be unveiled? What do you say were in the law that are not shadows of realities?

Tong
R1828

 

[Ferris Bueller]

What do you say were in the law that are not shadows of realities?

Tong
R1828

Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not covet your neighbor's stuff (including his wife, lol), do not hate, don't hold grudges, help your enemy, etc.

 

[Ferris Bueller]

Were the ten commandments shadows of realities to be unveiled?

Only the Sabbath commandment that I can see. It was a foreshadow of the unveiling of the rest that God has provided from the task master of sin, and self sufficiency.

 

[Tong2020]

Tong2020 said: ↑
What do you say were in the law that are not shadows of realities?

Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not covet your neighbor's stuff (including his wife, lol), do not hate, don't hold grudges, help your enemy, etc.

So you think those were not shadows of a reality? Perhaps it’s because you don’t realize or perhaps you don’t see those to be real in Christ.

That Christ is said to have fulfilled the law, I take that to mean that the law is realized in Christ ~ Christ is the reality for which those and the whole law is a shadow of.

Tong
R1829

 

[Tong2020]

Tong2020 said: ↑
Were the ten commandments shadows of realities to be unveiled?

Only the Sabbath commandment that I can see. It was a foreshadow of the unveiling of the rest that God has provided from the task master of sin, and self sufficiency.

Then I think that you really don’t realize or don’t see those to be real in Christ.

That Christ is said to have fulfilled the law, I take that to mean that the law is realized in Christ ~ Christ is the reality for which those and the whole law is a shadow of.


Tong
R1830

 

[Ferris Bueller]

So you think those were not shadows of a reality? Perhaps it’s because you don’t realize or perhaps you don’t see those to be real in Christ.

What reality do they represent that is not already contained within those commandments? For example, don't lie means don't lie, period.

 

[Ferris Bueller]

That Christ is said to have fulfilled the law, I take that to mean that the law is realized in Christ ~ Christ is the reality for which those and the whole law is a shadow of.

I don't see the commandments as being a shadow of that specifically. But surely Christ in us by the Holy Spirit is how the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in the believer. In two ways. The righteousness through which he kept the law is imputed to the believer via the Holy Spirit. Not just in the legal sense through the cleansing of the Spirit, but also through the power of the Spirit to fulfill those righteous requirements ourselves.

 

[Randy Kluth]

What do you want for me to explain there? That Scriptures has locked up everything under the control of sin? Well, the Scriptures is not the law and the law is not the Scriptures. Some perhaps take scriptures there as to mean the law. But Paul could had easily then just said law instead of scriptures. The scriptures there is the word of God, taken in general and collectively.

Regarding the law, I think the purpose as to why it was added and what it served is clear there. It was to hold Israel under guard and bring them to Christ, Him sent by the Father, to testify of the Father and reveal and make Him known to them. So, that they might be justified, as Abraham was justified, by faith in Him.

Tong
R1826

A brother warned me that you would not argue in good faith, and I'm wondering if he's right? Paul is referring to the Law as "the Scriptures" in this verse. The context is plain.

If you you wish to argue for the sake of arguing, I'm not interested. Paul meant to say the Law, as "Scriptures," used that particular form of Scriptures, ie the Law, to lock men up under legal condemnation so that salvation would only come by the name of Jesus, and not by the works of men apart from or before the atonement of Christ.

Gal 3.22 But Scripture has locked up everything under the control of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.
23 Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. 24 So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. 25 Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

 

[Tong2020]

What reality do they represent that is not already contained within those commandments? For example, don't lie means don't lie, period.

Well, we have different eyes, I see.

Look at the reality and not at the shadow.

Tong
R1832

 

[Tong2020]

Tong2020 said: ↑
That Christ is said to have fulfilled the law, I take that to mean that the law is realized in Christ ~ Christ is the reality for which those and the whole law is a shadow of.

I don't see the commandments as being a shadow of that specifically. But surely Christ in us by the Holy Spirit is how the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in the believer. In two ways. The righteousness through which he kept the law is imputed to the believer via the Holy Spirit. Not just in the legal sense through the cleansing of the Spirit, but also through the power of the Spirit to fulfill those righteous requirements ourselves.

We are not the reality of the shadow. Christ is.

Tong
R1833

 

[Randy Kluth]

That does not make faith to be works.

A brother warned me that you do not debate in good faith, and I'm beginning to believe him. Anybody is entitled to be given a chance, and you've had yours. If faith = works, then of course it "makes faith to be works."

God wanting for them to be righteous does not make them righteous. I hope you can understand what I am saying.

No, nothing you're saying now makes any sense. If God wanted people to be righteous by obeying the Law, then they could obey the Law and be viewed as righteous. Are you calling God a liar?

That’s right. It is faith that is the matter, not works. Take away faith and every deed is nothing in the eyes of God, though men sees it to be righteous. So, if you are talking about righteousness in the sight of man, yes works make the man righteous in that sense. Such righteousness does not account to salvation.

No, I'm not just talking about righteousness in the sight of men, but righteousness in the sight of anybody! The sense of "righteousness in the sight of men" was used by Jesus to refer to false righteousness. I'm talking about real righteousness.

Yes. But I must point out that it’s all because of faith.

Agree, Abraham and Israel obeyed God in the matter of circumcision and were considered really righteous, and not just righteous "in the sight of men."

Enough for what?

Faith is enough to obtain mercy when repenting. But faith does not obtain eternal life apart from or before the atonement of Christ. We are talking about the effective quality of faith to obtain real righteousness--not about its ability to obtain eternal life.

Our faith did not obtain that except by directing our faith towards Christ's atonement and Spirit. It was Christ who won our atonement--not our faith. Our faith obtains it indirectly through the work of Christ in atoning for our sins.

This is a bit of a semantics problem. Faith does and does not obtain eternal life. We have to decide the context before explaining what we mean. Faith does not obtain eternal life on its own, apart from the atonement of Christ. But faith does obtain eternal life after Christ's atonement has been made and we exercise faith in that atonement.

The righteousness of faith is not a result of works. It is on account of faith that God imputed or accounted righteousness to Abraham, justifying him, which amounts to the forgiveness of his sins. If you will just make some observation as to the occasion when Abraham was justified by God, you will find out that it was just all about faith in God. Nothing at all about forgiveness nor obedience.

On the contrary, Abraham was said to be justified by faith precisely because he was a sinner, coming out of paganism. He had no other basis by which to approach God. He could not even respond to God's word unless God had first approached him in his unworthiness.

So it was not by his deeds that he was justified, but by faith that enabled him to enter into a covenant with God and then please God through works of faith. Offering his son Isaac in response to God's word was indeed a work of righteousness. It was a work of faith.

Again, this is a semantics battle. In context, Abraham was justified *before* he had done anything for God because initially he was in an unworthy condition. After being made worthy by the mercy of God he could do works of faith that justified him in an entirely different sense.

Paul is talking about our inability to be justified by our own record, because by our own record we are found to be unworthy. And so, we are justified by faith, and not by works.

But there is an entirely different sense of being justified by works of faith, in which we are seen as righteous after having been given a dispensation of mercy in our unworthiness. 1st we are justified despite the fact we are sinners. And then the righteousness by which we obtain forgiveness is followed up by works of faith through which we are now viewed as righteous saints.

Again, I fall back on Paul's use of "shortcuts." By "faith" he refers to approaching God with a stained record, forbidden from approaching the Tree of Life. By his faith, Abraham obtained mercy and was viewed as righteous, for the purpose of obtaining atonement for his sins.

That was Paul's concern. He was not concerned about saying that Works of the Law do not justify a man as a righteous man. No, he knew that the Law itself proved that Man had an unworthy record, and was disqualified from the Tree of Life.

But Paul in no way was saying that obedience to the Law did not make Israel righteous! He was only saying that Works under the Law prevented Israel from obtaining eternal life until Christ's atonement took place.

Thus, the Law shut men off from eternal life until Christ's atonement was made. It offered righteousness to Israel by faith, but their works did not justify them in the sense of obtaining eternal life--not until Christ's atonement had been made.

 

[Tong2020]

Tong2020 said: ↑
What do you want for me to explain there? That Scriptures has locked up everything under the control of sin? Well, the Scriptures is not the law and the law is not the Scriptures. Some perhaps take scriptures there as to mean the law. But Paul could had easily then just said law instead of scriptures. The scriptures there is the word of God, taken in general and collectively.

Regarding the law, I think the purpose as to why it was added and what it served is clear there. It was to hold Israel under guard and bring them to Christ, Him sent by the Father, to testify of the Father and reveal and make Him known to them. So, that they might be justified, as Abraham was justified, by faith in Him.

A brother warned me that you would not argue in good faith, and I'm wondering if he's right? Paul is referring to the Law as "the Scriptures" in this verse. The context is plain.

If you you wish to argue for the sake of arguing, I'm not interested. Paul meant to say the Law, as "Scriptures," used that particular form of Scriptures, ie the Law, to lock men up under legal condemnation so that salvation would only come by the name of Jesus, and not by the works of men apart from or before the atonement of Christ.

Gal 3.22 But Scripture has locked up everything under the control of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.
23 Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. 24 So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. 25 Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

If you believe I am arguing for nothing and is just playing around, you have to settle that with yourself. I have already told you that I am not here to fool around and waste time, mine and yours.

You have your understanding according to your point of view, as do I. Not that I argue my view against yours means I don’t argue in good faith.

Like for example here. You take scriptures to mean the law while I take it to mean not just the law, but the word of God in general and collectively. I will argue for my view and you argue for your view. Is there bad faith in that? You argue you consider context. Well I do too. Is there bad faith in that? If you don’t find me honest and just want to argue for the sake of arguing, just don’t respond to my posts. I am not forcing you to respond.

Look at Gal.3:22, Paul refers to Scriptures. When he wants to refer to law, he says “law”, like in Gal.3:5,10,11,12,13,14,18, 19,21,24. I see no reason for Paul to use Scriptures in v.22 to actually refer to law, when he used “law” in those verses. He could have just conveniently, easily, and more clearly used law rather than scriptures if what he is referring to is the law. Perhaps you can give me a reason why.

Tong
R1834

 

[Tong2020]

Tong2020 said: ↑
That does not make faith to be works.

A brother warned me that you do not debate in good faith, and I'm beginning to believe him. Anybody is entitled to be given a chance, and you've had yours. If faith = works, then of course it "makes faith to be works."

If you believe that I do not debate in good faith, then just do not debate with me. What chance are you talking about? As if you are implying by that that I was dishonest once and I had my chance to be honest? If this dialogue just causes you to have such bad thoughts on me, that is not good. Better that you just not respond.

Faith = works? Do you mean they are the same? Or do you mean faith produce works?

Faith and works are not the same thing. So, faith isn’t work and work isn’t faith. Love produces works. But that does not make love is of work or make love to be work.

Tong2020 said: ↑
God wanting for them to be righteous does not make them righteous. I hope you can understand what I am saying.

No, nothing you're saying now makes any sense. If God wanted people to be righteous by obeying the Law, then they could obey the Law and be viewed as righteous. Are you calling God a liar?

How could you even ask me that question? Do you think I would call God a liar? Wow. Is that how you see me? If I am a cause for such bad thoughts, just let me know, and I’ll stop responding to your post.

If you don’t see the difference in “God wanted for them to be righteous” and “God make them righteous”, then that’s just it. There is no good argument that can be made on that.

Tong2020 said: ↑
That’s right. It is faith that is the matter, not works. Take away faith and every deed is nothing in the eyes of God, though men sees it to be righteous. So, if you are talking about righteousness in the sight of man, yes works make the man righteous in that sense. Such righteousness does not account to salvation.

No, I'm not just talking about righteousness in the sight of men, but righteousness in the sight of anybody! The sense of "righteousness in the sight of men" was used by Jesus to refer to false righteousness. I'm talking about real righteousness.

Real righteousness? And what do you refer to by that?

May I ask, are there righteous works that a pagan or or an atheist or an unbeliever does? If there are, are they righteous (real) because they do such works? Would you say they are righteous in the sight of God?

Tong2020 said: ↑
Yes. But I must point out that it’s all because of faith.

Agree, Abraham and Israel obeyed God in the matter of circumcision and were considered really righteous, and not just righteous "in the sight of men."

In the case of Abraham, that is a matter of course. But with Israel, being a group of people, I could not say that all those who got themselves circumcised were with faith. So, I could not say that they were righteous inbthe sight of God.

Tong2020 said: ↑
Enough for what?

Faith is enough to obtain mercy when repenting. But faith does not obtain eternal life apart from or before the atonement of Christ. We are talking about the effective quality of faith to obtain real righteousness--not about its ability to obtain eternal life.

Our faith did not obtain that except by directing our faith towards Christ's atonement and Spirit. It was Christ who won our atonement--not our faith. Our faith obtains it indirectly through the work of Christ in atoning for our sins.

This is a bit of a semantics problem. Faith does and does not obtain eternal life. We have to decide the context before explaining what we mean. Faith does not obtain eternal life on its own, apart from the atonement of Christ. But faith does obtain eternal life after Christ's atonement has been made and we exercise faith in that atonement.

Effective quality of faith? What is that?

Tong
R1835