Is all of the law of Moses finished?

[daq]

Sorry, but I have been out of town. But I would like to clarify something here. It would have been nice if you had simply stuck to the reference that I used concerning Abraham. I quoted from Paul's letter to the Galatians concerning the two sons that Abraham had. This is relevant to the topic at hand, being the law of Moses. The first son from Abraham is symbolic of the covenant of law that came down from Mount Sinai, and it gives birth to bondage, as Paul said. We can gloss it over by saying that Abraham was merely learning over time. However, the significance of his attempt to produce a son from another source than whom God promised it would happen, is what it is. And furthermore, Paul used it to make a comparison between works and faith...between law and grace. I didn't make that up. You as well admit that his first son was of the flesh. This was not an attack against Abraham on your part, my part, nor on Paul's part, nor was it a refusal to acknowledge Abraham's faith on my part or on Paul's part. Putting words in my mouth or attacking my own "apparent" agenda is nothing more than a diversion from the topic at hand. This is not about me. This is not about winning by way of invalidating the opponent.

If you have followed my posts at all, you would know that I have never denied the importance of our walk with God and the importance of right living. My emphasis is and has always been on the motives for these. As we can learn from Paul's letter, it is not really the law that Paul was attacking, but rather he was correcting their attempt to be 'justified' by law. This is all about motive. Thanks for your time.

Is it now considered an "attack" to repeat what you clearly stated and refute it? If FAITH is the foundation of your belief system then how can you state that Abraham failed to believe God when the Scripture clearly refutes exactly what you have stated? One of the reasons I argued the point is because you appear to exchange "faithfulness" (which is an ongoing TRUST producing various works of faith) in lieu of "faith" which the majority theologically prefer because in most minds it translates into a simple one time confession of belief for the reward of "eternal salvation". However, to do this you must detach the upright works of Abraham from his faithfulness and rather turn the situation into a one time occurrence of "confession-belief-faith" and, therefore, according to your doctrine apparently Abraham did not believe God when Ishmael was born because that is exactly what you have stated:

Abraham's attempt to help God fulfill his promise is seen in his son from Hagar. It represents a failure to believe God.

Likewise it appears you may not have read some of the other posts already in this thread concerning Jerusalem of Above -vs- Jerusalem of Below or perhaps you might have noticed that when you mention Mount Sinai you conveniently leave out Mount Horeb, the Mountain of God. The two are not the same in supernal meaning; Sinai is the allegory of the flesh and Horeb is of the Spirit, (and as I said; Paul left out Mount Horeb for good reason, so you might want to think about that statement because it is highly probable that the westernized modern "grace only" mindset is part of the overall reason why the Spirit led Paul to write the passage in the Way that he did). However, there is no sense in rehashing these things all over again when all of it is already posted on the previous page. It is not an "attack" to defend my position that Abraham believed God, (just as the Scripture clearly states) when you have clearly denied the same for reasons critical only to your doctrinal stance. Neither is it an "attack" to state the obvious conclusion that when you have suggested Abraham suffered from unbelief you have essentially overthrown your own foundation, which is faith. My own foundation upon Messiah the Rock is nearly the same; continuing faithfulness and trust in the Father through his Son, and thus, I have good reason to take issue when you are teaching things that would likewise undermine my own understanding, (if such things were true). I would hope that any brother would do the same for me.

 

[williemac]

Is it now considered an "attack" to repeat what you clearly stated and refute it? If FAITH is the foundation of your belief system then how can you state that Abraham failed to believe God when the Scripture clearly refutes exactly what you have stated? One of the reasons I argued the point is because you appear to exchange "faithfulness" (which is an ongoing TRUST producing various works of faith) in lieu of "faith" which the majority theologically prefer because in most minds it translates into a simple one time confession of belief for the reward of "eternal salvation". However, to do this you must detach the upright works of Abraham from his faithfulness and rather turn the situation into a one time occurrence of "confession-belief-faith" and, therefore, according to your doctrine apparently Abraham did not believe God when Ishmael was born because that is exactly what you have stated:

I already explained myself. I repeated what was written about Abraham. His first reaction to the promise was not the same as his final one. His faith was commended by James. The example James used was his willingness to offer his son on the alter. This was a test that he passed. But his first son was not Isaac. His first son was his own attempt to fulfill the promise. This is exactly why it is referred to as that of the flesh. What you seem to be ignoring is the obvious..that Abraham was not perfect. The bible says there is none righteous. This includes Abraham. Righteousness was placed on his account because he (finally) believed God. (Rom.4:3) It was not placed on his account because of any actual works of righteousness. By the way, Rom.4:3 says nothing about faithfulness. The exact wording is " Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness".

In fact, the second son came along by way of a miracle. It was an act of God. The test that Abraham passed came afterward. I think it would be easier to believe God once Abraham had already seen His power at work by giving him a son through his barren wife. Before this miracle, Abraham attempted to have a son another way than how God said it would be.

These two events leading to two sons are recorded and are mentioned by Paul to the Galatians. The first is called that of the flesh, the second, that of promise. Abraham was involved in both. But his test of faith came even afterward. And the record of his faith was in reference to the incident at the alter..not before.

But I must refer to your comment about this so called one time confession of belief being rewarded by eternal salvation. You apparently have a problem with the idea that life is a free gift.

Here is Rom.5:18 (NKJ)..." Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life"

Read also the verses leading up to this one. The word "gift" is used 5 times in vs.15-17. If we have to earn life through our own works or faithfulness, as you call it, then it is not free. But it is free. It is offered as a gift of grace through the death, resurrection, and life of One man, Jesus Christ...so that no human can boast before God.

In fact, in Rom.10:8-10 this is what it says...8 .." But what does it say? The word is near you, in you mouth and in your heart (that is the word of faith which we preach)..9.." that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved...10..."For with the heart one believes to righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation" .

It pains me to consider that those who don't accept the concept of heart belief for salvation are they who do not have it. But what do they have? I shudder to think that they rather are working for the free gift. Please say it ain't so.

God gives grace to the humble. Years ago I had an experience of poverty to the extent that I reached out to what was then called the welfare office for help. It was one of the most humbling things I ever experienced...asking for help. Asking for charity.

In Luke 18:10-14, as Jesus described two men praying..the one who beat his breast in humility and confessed his sin, and pleaded for mercy, was he who went away justified. The other who placed his confidence in his deeds and actions (faithfulness) did not. As Jesus said in conclusion..." they who humble themselves will be exalted and they who exalt themselves will be abased" (vs.14).
God gives grace to the humble. The heart belief that saves us is that which accepts the offer of life that is made possible through the work and death of One Man. This heart belief is the foundation of our salvation and is not to be changed or exchanged for another way. It must remain intact. Keep the faith, my friend. It needs no supplement. It requires no supplement. Trust the promise. Trust God. He is good. In fact, there is only one who is good, and one who is God. Life is His to give freely. If He chooses to do that, who are we to question Him? He doesn't need our help in fulfilling His promise. He simply requires our humble acceptance of it.

 

[daq]

I already explained myself. I repeated what was written about Abraham. His first reaction to the promise was not the same as his final one. His faith was commended by James. The example James used was his willingness to offer his son on the alter. This was a test that he passed. But his first son was not Isaac. His first son was his own attempt to fulfill the promise. This is exactly why it is referred to as that of the flesh. What you seem to be ignoring is the obvious..that Abraham was not perfect. The bible says there is none righteous. This includes Abraham. Righteousness was placed on his account because he (finally) believed God. (Rom.4:3) It was not placed on his account because of any actual works of righteousness. By the way, Rom.4:3 says nothing about faithfulness. The exact wording is " Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness".

In fact, the second son came along by way of a miracle. It was an act of God. The test that Abraham passed came afterward. I think it would be easier to believe God once Abraham had already seen His power at work by giving him a son through his barren wife. Before this miracle, Abraham attempted to have a son another way than how God said it would be.

These two events leading to two sons are recorded and are mentioned by Paul to the Galatians. The first is called that of the flesh, the second, that of promise. Abraham was involved in both. But his test of faith came even afterward. And the record of his faith was in reference to the incident at the alter..not before.

But I must refer to your comment about this so called one time confession of belief being rewarded by eternal salvation. You apparently have a problem with the idea that life is a free gift.

Here is Rom.5:18 (NKJ)..." Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life"

Read also the verses leading up to this one. The word "gift" is used 5 times in vs.15-17. If we have to earn life through our own works or faithfulness, as you call it, then it is not free. But it is free. It is offered as a gift of grace through the death, resurrection, and life of One man, Jesus Christ...so that no human can boast before God.

In fact, in Rom.10:8-10 this is what it says...8 .." But what does it say? The word is near you, in you mouth and in your heart (that is the word of faith which we preach)..9.." that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved...10..."For with the heart one believes to righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation" .

It pains me to consider that those who don't accept the concept of heart belief for salvation are they who do not have it. But what do they have? I shudder to think that they rather are working for the free gift. Please say it ain't so.

God gives grace to the humble. Years ago I had an experience of poverty to the extent that I reached out to what was then called the welfare office for help. It was one of the most humbling things I ever experienced...asking for help. Asking for charity.

In Luke 18:10-14, as Jesus described two men praying..the one who beat his breast in humility and confessed his sin, and pleaded for mercy, was he who went away justified. The other who placed his confidence in his deeds and actions (faithfulness) did not. As Jesus said in conclusion..." they who humble themselves will be exalted and they who exalt themselves will be abased" (vs.14).
God gives grace to the humble. The heart belief that saves us is that which accepts the offer of life that is made possible through the work and death of One Man. This heart belief is the foundation of our salvation and is not to be changed or exchanged for another way. It must remain intact. Keep the faith, my friend. It needs no supplement. It requires no supplement. Trust the promise. Trust God. He is good. In fact, there is only one who is good, and one who is God. Life is His to give freely. If He chooses to do that, who are we to question Him? He doesn't need our help in fulfilling His promise. He simply requires our humble acceptance of it.

And I likewise explained myself but you simply do not have the desire to see what is written because of a theological paradigm.

I already explained myself. I repeated what was written about Abraham. His first reaction to the promise was not the same as his final one. His faith was commended by James. The example James used was his willingness to offer his son on the alter. This was a test that he passed.

This opening portion of your comments is again incorrect and clearly reveals that you are willing to ignore a twenty to forty year walk with God which in the end caused Abraham to be called the friend of God. Like I stated; why rehash it all over again because more than likely on the next page after this, or in the next thread to come along, you will again be claiming the same false statements that you claim to be true now.

This is an empty theology when the works that Abraham did are removed or ignored.
Most people quote the following at this point but I do so to make a different point than the usual:

James 2:21-23 KJV
21. Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22. Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
23. And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

Genesis 15:1-6 KJV
1. After these things the word of the Lord came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.
2. And Abram said, Lord God, what wilt thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus?
3. And Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir.
4. And, behold, the word of the Lord came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.
5. And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.
6. And he believed in the Lord; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

Where and when is this fulfilled according to James?

Genesis 22:1-2 KJV
1. And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am.
2. And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.

The span of time between these events is estimated anywhere between 25 to 45 years depending on the age of Isaac.

In addition this span of YEARS in Abraham's life includes only the time from belief in the promise to its fulfillment.
The sojourn-walk of father Abraham in FAITHFULNESS commenced at Ur of the Chaldees and he lived 175 years.

Likewise the Genesis 15 account is a VISION wherein there is no record of any outward statement of faith. Neither is there any such thing recorded in any of the passages regarding this particular topic of discussion. Abraham simply believed God and it was accounted to him as moral rightness. Rather than a "statement of faith" or "confession of faith" (where he might have bowed the knee and said "I Believe! I Believe!") it was his DEEDS which revealed his FAITH. This faith was FULFILLED when he eventually showed by his ACTIONS BASED IN FAITHFULNESS that he was even willing to offer up the son of the fulfillment of the very promise which he have believed to begin with.

 

[williemac]

And I likewise explained myself but you simply do not have the desire to see what is written because of a theological paradigm.


This opening portion of your comments is again incorrect and clearly reveals that you are willing to ignore a twenty to forty year walk with God which in the end caused Abraham to be called the friend of God. Like I stated; why rehash it all over again because more than likely on the next page after this, or in the next thread to come along, you will again be claiming the same false statements that you claim to be true now.


In addition this span of YEARS in Abraham's life includes only the time from belief in the promise to its fulfillment.
The sojourn-walk of father Abraham in FAITHFULNESS commenced at Ur of the Chaldees and he lived 175 years.

Likewise the Genesis 15 account is a VISION wherein there is no record of any outward statement of faith. Neither is there any such thing recorded in any of the passages regarding this particular topic of discussion. Abraham simply believed God and it was accounted to him as moral rightness. Rather than a "statement of faith" or "confession of faith" (where he might have bowed the knee and said "I Believe! I Believe!") it was his DEEDS which revealed his FAITH. This faith was FULFILLED when he eventually showed by his ACTIONS BASED IN FAITHFULNESS that he was even willing to offer up the son of the fulfillment of the very promise which he have believed to begin with.

However, James offered up another example. He mentioned Rahab the harlot, who was asked to help God's messengers and received assurance that if she did, God would spare her. How do we know she believed it? She helped them. The point we can get from this is that whatever we believe in our heart will be made manifest by what we do. The account of Abraham mentions his conclusion that God was able to raise up his son from the dead. . Yes he was faithful in obeying the instruction to offer him up. But that was not the emphasis James used to confirm his faith. That is rather the emphasis that you are using. However, you didn't write any of the bible. The text says what it says. If we want to quote James about faith and works, then we should stick to his letter and not run off somewhere else to put words in his mouth.

So how do we know that I believe life is a free gift? You can see it in what I say and what I do. There are those who don't accept that life is a free gift. You can also see it in what they say and do. God knows our motives. We may well be doing the same kinds of things, but for different reasons. I am doing them in response to the free gift. Others are doing them to be justified. Only one of those two are works of faith. The other is works of unbelief. This is why I am emphasizing motive. One can be faithful in order to ensure his own eternal well being, and the other can be faithful out of a pure love response to what he has received. Real love does not seek its own. Fake love is merely looking out for its own interests. But on the outside, they may well look the same. We are advised to not judge according to appearances. From that, we know that neither does God. He knows the heart. This is why Paul mentions the heart in Rom. 10:9,10.

Life is something we receive at the beginning of our walk with God, not the end. This is found in several references, not the least of which is John 5:24. And He who begins this work is also he who completes it. We do not make ourselves perfect by way of the flesh. Our works are not for the purpose of perfecting us nor keeping us. Those are His works. Our works are merely a demonstration of what he has already accomplished in us. They will gain rewards on the judgment seat of Christ. But the measure and quality of our works and faithfulness do not determine our eternal destiny. If they did, we would have something of which to boast.

But in your effort to insist that faith really means faithfulness, the bible has a safeguard to prevent this error. It uses the word " believe". It uses it over and over. Faith is merely the noun. The verb is believe. On the other hand, faithfulness is listed as one of the fruits of the spirit. It comes as a result of having received the spirit. It does not lead up to our receiving the spirit. Please do not reverse the order.

 

[daq]

The account of Abraham mentions his conclusion that God was able to raise up his son from the dead. . Yes he was faithful in obeying the instruction to offer him up. But that was not the emphasis James used to confirm his faith. That is rather the emphasis that you are using. However, you didn't write any of the bible. The text says what it says. If we want to quote James about faith and works, then we should stick to his letter and not run off somewhere else to put words in his mouth.

So how do we know that I believe life is a free gift? You can see it in what I say and what I do. There are those who don't accept that life is a free gift. You can also see it in what they say and do. God knows our motives. We may well be doing the same kinds of things, but for different reasons. I am doing them in response to the free gift. Others are doing them to be justified. Only one of those two are works of faith. The other is works of unbelief. This is why I am emphasizing motive. One can be faithful in order to ensure his own eternal well being, and the other can be faithful out of a pure love response to what he has received. Real love does not seek its own. Fake love is merely looking out for its own interests. But on the outside, they may well look the same. We are advised to not judge according to appearances. From that, we know that neither does God. He knows the heart. This is why Paul mentions the heart in Rom. 10:9,10.

Life is something we receive at the beginning of our walk with God, not the end. This is found in several references, not the least of which is John 5:24. And He who begins this work is also he who completes it. We do not make ourselves perfect by way of the flesh. Our works are not for the purpose of perfecting us nor keeping us. Those are His works. Our works are merely a demonstration of what he has already accomplished in us. They will gain rewards on the judgment seat of Christ. But the measure and quality of our works and faithfulness do not determine our eternal destiny. If they did, we would have something of which to boast.

But in your effort to insist that faith really means faithfulness, the bible has a safeguard to prevent this error. It uses the word " believe". It uses it over and over. Faith is merely the noun. The verb is believe. On the other hand, faithfulness is listed as one of the fruits of the spirit. It comes as a result of having received the spirit. It does not lead up to our receiving the spirit. Please do not reverse the order.

Your attempt at judging me and my motives only reveals that you have no real argument from the Scripture and are doing what you have already been attempting to accuse me of doing to you. It was not me who pointed you to the story of Abraham but rather it was the Epistle of James. It was not me who stated that Abraham did not yet believe God and the result was Ishmael; that also was you. Your comments are divisive not only because you keep pitting yourself against me or anyone else who disagrees with you but likewise you appear willing to cut out whatever portion of Scripture you do not care to believe, act as if it does not exist, and shame on anyone else who distracts you from your tunnel-vision version of the truth. Such actions are not "rightly dividing the word" but rather incorrectly dividing the Truth and cutting your own self out of the House of God. What you call a "free gift" is more correctly a "free doron-sacrifice" which is the sacrifice of the Passover Lamb of God offered freely to any and all who will EAT of the sacrifice. If you and your house will not EAT ALL of it then you do not receive the promises contained therein, (every man is a household like Stephanas). When Paul states "Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." he is likewise pointing you to Exodus 12 and all of the other passages which pertain to the Passover and its commandments, (including all of the Testimony of Yeshua which fulfills his portion of the sacrifice freely offered to all of us). You do not get to ignore the Old Covenant and make up your own ham festival of doctrines.

 

[williemac]

Your attempt at judging me and my motives only reveals that you have no real argument from the Scripture and are doing what you have already been attempting to accuse me of doing to you. It was not me who pointed you to the story of Abraham but rather it was the Epistle of James. It was not me who stated that Abraham did not yet believe God and the result was Ishmael; that also was you. Your comments are divisive not only because you keep pitting yourself against me or anyone else who disagrees with you but likewise you appear willing to cut out whatever portion of Scripture you do not care to believe, act as if it does not exist, and shame on anyone else who distracts you from your tunnel-vision version of the truth. Such actions are not "rightly dividing the word" but rather incorrectly dividing the Truth and cutting your own self out of the House of God. What you call a "free gift" is more correctly a "free doron-sacrifice" which is the sacrifice of the Passover Lamb of God offered freely to any and all who will EAT of the sacrifice. If you and your house will not EAT ALL of it then you do not receive the promises contained therein, (every man is a household like Stephanas). When Paul states "Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." he is likewise pointing you to Exodus 12 and all of the other passages which pertain to the Passover and its commandments, (including all of the Testimony of Yeshua which fulfills his portion of the sacrifice freely offered to all of us). You do not get to ignore the Old Covenant and make up your own ham festival of doctrines.

If I want to judge you and your motives, I will make it obvious. What I have repeatedly said is that this is not about me,nor you. I said that to assure you that I am not judging you. What I am disputing is a doctrine, not a brother. We do not own the truth. If you prefer to be defensive about your belief by taking it personally, that is your choice. Nothing I can do about it. This is a debate site. We are discussing and debating doctrine. Why are you questioning my motives? I am not here to attack anyone but to defend what I believe is the truth.

And by the way, the old covenant is called that for a reason. There is a new one, based on better promises. Paul made mention of the two in Gal.4:24. This whole discussion about Abraham has been a distraction from the original point I was making and the subject of the op. What do we do with the law of Moses?

I will say flat out, if we are using it to justify ourselves before God, we are in error. It was not intended for that purpose. It was intended to regulate sinners and to remind them of their sin until the Seed should come. Under the covenant of grace, we are not intended to be regulated by the law of Moses. We are intended to be regulated by the new nature that is within us. Neither are we intended to be justified or made righteous or granted eternal life by the law of Moses. Rom.10:4 states that Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to they who believe. Rom.5:1 concludes that we are justified by faith. John 3:16, 5:24, 6:10,51, assure us that everlasting life comes through the acceptance of the One sacrifice for sin. And this indeed is an intellectual assent. But it includes trusting God rather than one's own efforts. It includes the humility that is required in order to receive His gift of charity.

Jesus insisted that we humble ourselves. If I am repeating His command, why do you take it personally? It is not for me to judge you in the subject of humility and pride. But if a brother is being enticed in self righteous undertakings, then why wouldn't I step up to the plate and fight for his soul? I am not ignoring the old covenant as you suggest. I am merely keeping it in its context. We are not in it. We are not under it. I will indeed oppose the suggestion that we are if it is being made.

I do appreciate your use of 1Cor.5:7,8. However, in the context, the brother who was in sin, who was cast out, was delivered to Satan for the destruction of his flesh " that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus" (5:5) Paul was in no way casting this man out of the kingdom of God, nor was he suggesting such. The man was removed from fellowship in order to chasten him into repentance. This is a passage about chastening. In fact, later on the man was restored to fellowship. Under the old covenant this would have meant being cut out of the House of God, as you call it. Under the new, Jesus promised to rebuke and chasten those whom He loves> One such example is in Rev. 2:20, where Jesus mentions those whom He called His servants, who were being seduced into sexual immorality. There again, instead of threatening them with banishment, He talked of giving them much trouble in their life unless they change their ways.(great tribulation). For those who are His, sin in this life will bring us trouble in this life. It will not be used to judge us for condemnation. We are assured that we will not come under this judgement (John 5:24). We are also assured that we can and will be chastened in this life if required. We are not to confuse the two. They are unrelated categories.