Observations about the law, the Law, God's law, Christ's law - four different things

[St. SteVen]

St. SteVen said:
I find that what the Bible says about the law is quite contradictory.
Your example of Psalms 19:7-11 makes this quite clear.

I grew up as a Baptist being taught to have a negative view of obeying the Law of Moses, however, the Psalms express an extremely positive view of obeying it, such as with David repeatedly saying that he loved it and delighted in obeying it, so I realized that if I was going to continue to believe that the Psalms are Scripture, then I needed to also believe that they express a a correct view of obeying it and that I therefore also needed to change my view to match the Psalms.

You made a choice. I applaud that. It was your spiritual journey and you were drawn in that direction. No worries.
Obviously David did not have the NT in his "Bible". He found, as did you. something to love in the law of Moses.

In Acts 15:1, the topic that they were discussing was not whether followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to God’s commands but rather they were discussing the means of salvation in regard to whether Gentiles are required to have first become circumcised in order to become saved as the result.

It was more than that, as if that wasn't bad enough.
Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.” - Acts 15:5 NIV

And frankly the issue was ridiculous. These gentiles had believed the message, been baptized in water and the Spirit with evidence of the manifestations of the Spirit. Why was their salvation in question at all?

Why hadn't the baptized believers in Samaria received the Holy Spirit?

Why hadn't the baptized believers in Samaria received the Holy Spirit? Just to be clear, I do not question whether the believers in Samaria had received the "indwelling" Spirit when they believed. They were missing something else. Acts 8:14-17 NIV When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that...

www.christianityboard.com

In Acts 15:10-11, they ruled that the means of salvation is by grace, which means that the heavy burden that no one could bear is not the Law of Moses but salvation by circumcision.

Why was infant circumcision a yoke that they couldn't bear? And how on earth did it equate to salvation?

Everything that Jesus said after “but I say unto you…” was in accordance with the OT.

I don't buy that at all. The word "But" indicates a pivot away from the contrasting thought.

St. SteVen said:
And He is known to be a Sabbath breaker. (John 5:18; John 9:16; Matthew 12:1; Mark 2:23; Luke 6:1)

Some of God’s laws appear to conflict with each other such as when God commanded to rest on the Sabbath while also commanding priests to make offerings on the Sabbath (Numbers 28:9-10), however, it was not the case that priests were forced to sin by disobeying one of the two commands no matter what they chose to do but that the lesser command was never intended to be understood as preventing the greater command from being obeyed. This is why Jesus said in Matthew 12:5-7 that priests who did their duties on the Sabbath were held innocent, why David and his men were held innocent, and why Jesus defended his disciples as being innocent.

I agree. I'm not saying that Jesus was sinning, but the perception was exactly that and He didn't come back with a defense except to say that He was Lord of the Sabbath. (He could do as He pleased) It was His.

St. SteVen said:
2 Corinthians 3:6-11 NIV
He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—
not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

The New Covenant involves God putting the Law of Moses in our hearts and writing it on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33) and God taking away our hearts of stone, giving us hearts of flesh, and sending His Spirit to lead us in obedience to His law

That all sounds fine and good, but what did the Apostle say about it?
It was the transitory ministry that brought condemnation and death, which has no glory now.
The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. And you say that should be written on our hearts? No thanks!

 

[Soyeong]

God's commandments in the bible makes up what is referred too as...law.

That is sometimes but not always true. The Bible refers to multiple categories of law other than the Law of God, so it is always important to discern which law Paul is referring to. For example, in Romans 7-8, Paul said that the Law of God is good, that he wanted to do good, that he delighted in obeying it, and that he served it with his mind in contrast with the law of sin, which was working within his members to cause him not to do the good that he wanted to do, which was waging war against the law of his mind, which he served with his flesh, and which the Law of the Spirit has freed us from. The Law of God leads us to do what is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12) while the law of sin leads us in the opposite direction by stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death (Romans 7:5). Verses that refer to something that would be absurd for Paul to delight in doing should not be interpreted as referring to the Law of God while verses that refer to a law that is sinful, that causes sin to increase, or that hinders us from obeying the Law of God should be interpreted as referring to the law of sin. For example, Romans 6:14 describes the law that we are not under as being a law where sin had dominion over him and it would be absurd for Paul to delight in that, but rather that is the role of the law of sin. In Romans 6:15, being under grace does not mean that we are permitted to sin, and in Romans 7:7, the Law of God is not sinful but how we know what sin is, so we are still under it.

In Romans 3:27, Paul contrasted a law of works with a law of faith, in Galatians 3:10-12, he contrasted the Book of the Law with “works of the law”, and in Romans 3:31 and Galatians 3:31, he said that our faith upholds the Law of God in contrast with saying that works of the law are not of faith, so that phrase does not refer to the Law of God, which is why it is not of faith.

 

[St. SteVen]

Galatians 4:21-31 NIV

Hagar and Sarah​

21 Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says?
22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman.
23 His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh,
but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a divine promise.

24 These things are being taken figuratively: The women represent two covenants.
One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar.
25 Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem,
because she is in slavery with her children.
26 But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother.
27 For it is written:

“Be glad, barren woman,
you who never bore a child;
shout for joy and cry aloud,
you who were never in labor;
because more are the children of the desolate woman
than of her who has a husband.”[e]

28 Now you, brothers and sisters, like Isaac, are children of promise.
29 At that time the son born according to the flesh persecuted
the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now.
30 But what does Scripture say?
“Get rid of the slave woman and her son,
for the slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.”[f]
31 Therefore, brothers and sisters,
we are not children of the slave woman,
but of the free woman.

 

[Soyeong]

Galatians 4:21-31 NIV

Hagar and Sarah​

21 Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says?
22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman.
23 His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh,
but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a divine promise.

24 These things are being taken figuratively: The women represent two covenants.
One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar.
25 Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem,
because she is in slavery with her children.
26 But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother.
27 For it is written:

“Be glad, barren woman,
you who never bore a child;
shout for joy and cry aloud,
you who were never in labor;
because more are the children of the desolate woman
than of her who has a husband.”[e]

28 Now you, brothers and sisters, like Isaac, are children of promise.
29 At that time the son born according to the flesh persecuted
the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now.
30 But what does Scripture say?
“Get rid of the slave woman and her son,
for the slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.”[f]
31 Therefore, brothers and sisters,
we are not children of the slave woman,
but of the free woman.

If God saved the Israelites out of slavery in Egypt in order to put them under slavery to His law, then it would be for slavery that Gid sets us free, however, Galatians 5:1 says that it is for free that God sets us free, so you are not correctly identifying what he was speaking against. In Psalms 119:142, the Law of Moses is truth, and in John 8:31-36, it is the transgression of the Law of Moses that puts us into slavery while the truth sets us free. Moreover, the Law of the Moses came through the line of the free woman, not the slave woman, so that should influence how you interpret Galatians 4.

 

[St. SteVen]

If God saved the Israelites out of slavery in Egypt in order to put them under slavery to His law, then it would be for slavery that Gid sets us free, however, Galatians 5:1 says that it is for free that God sets us free, so you are not correctly identifying what he was speaking against. In Psalms 119:142, the Law of Moses is truth, and in John 8:31-36, it is the transgression of the Law of Moses that puts us into slavery while the truth sets us free. Moreover, the Law of the Moses came through the line of the free woman, not the slave woman, so that should influence how you interpret Galatians 4.

Sounds like double-talk.
The Hagar and Sarah analogy needs to be contained to only that.
Otherwise it makes no sense.

30 But what does Scripture say?
“Get rid of the slave woman and her son,
for the slave woman’s son will never share
in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.”
31 Therefore, brothers and sisters,
we are not children of the slave woman,
but of the free woman.

 

[Soyeong]

Sounds like double-talk.
The Hagar and Sarah analogy needs to be contained to only that.
Otherwise it makes no sense.

30 But what does Scripture say?
“Get rid of the slave woman and her son,
for the slave woman’s son will never share
in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.”
31 Therefore, brothers and sisters,
we are not children of the slave woman,
but of the free woman.

God gave the children of the free woman the Law of Moses so how does it make sense to interpret Paul as saying that the being children of the free woman means that we don't need to obey the Law of Moses?

 

[St. SteVen]

If God saved the Israelites out of slavery in Egypt in order to put them under slavery to His law, then it would be for slavery that Gid sets us free, however, Galatians 5:1 says that it is for free that God sets us free, so you are not correctly identifying what he was speaking against. In Psalms 119:142, the Law of Moses is truth, and in John 8:31-36, it is the transgression of the Law of Moses that puts us into slavery while the truth sets us free. Moreover, the Law of the Moses came through the line of the free woman, not the slave woman, so that should influence how you interpret Galatians 4.

Just as I thought. You have it backwards.
Galatians 4:21 Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says?

 

[Soyeong]

Just as I thought. You have it backwards.
Galatians 4:21 Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says?

Which law should that verse be interpreted as referring to out of all of the categories of law that Paul spoke about and why?

Galatians 4:13 You know it was because of a bodily ailment that I preached the gospel to you at first,

If Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Law of Moses was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel of the Kingdom/Grace, which Paul also taught based on the Law of Moses:

Acts 14:21-22 When they had preached the gospel to that city and had made many disciples, they returned to Lystra and to Iconium and to Antioch, 22 strengthening the souls of the disciples, encouraging them to continue in the faith, and saying that through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God.

Acts 20:24-25 But I do not account my life of any value nor as precious to myself, if only I may finish my course and the ministry that I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God. 25 And now, behold, I know that none of you among whom I have gone about proclaiming the kingdom will see my face again.

Acts 28:23 When they had appointed a day for him, they came to him at his lodging in greater numbers. From morning till evening he expounded to them, testifying to the kingdom of God and trying to convince them about Jesus both from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets.

So should Galatians 4:21 be interpreted as speaking against believing the Gospel that Paul taught in Galatians 4:13? If not, then perhaps Paul was referring to a law other than the Law of Moses.

You also missed my question:

God gave the children of the free woman the Law of Moses so how does it make sense to interpret Paul as saying that the being children of the free woman means that we don't need to obey the Law of Moses?

 

[St. SteVen]

St. SteVen said:
Just as I thought. You have it backwards.
Galatians 4:21 Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says?

Which law should that verse be interpreted as referring to out of all of the categories of law that Paul spoke about and why?

The only law that Paul speaks of being UNDER. The law that God gave to the Israelites alone through Moses.

So should Galatians 4:21 be interpreted as speaking against believing the Gospel that Paul taught in Galatians 4:13? If not, then perhaps Paul was referring to a law other than the Law of Moses.

Paul was not preaching that anyone should be under the law. That was not his gospel.

Romans 3:21-22a NIV
But now apart from the law the righteousness of God
has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify.
22 This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe.

You also missed my question:

God gave the children of the free woman the Law of Moses so how does it make sense to interpret Paul as saying that the being children of the free woman means that we don't need to obey the Law of Moses?

You still have it backwards. This has no bearing on what Paul is saying about Hagar and Sarah.

 

[St. SteVen]

Observations about the law, the Law, God's law, Christ's law - four different things​

- What's the difference between the law and the Law? (capital L)

- What's the difference between the law and God's law?

- What's the difference between the law, God's law, and Christ's law?


The law, the Law, God's law, Christ's law; four different things.

Agree, or disagree? Points outlined below. Thanks.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What's the difference between the law and the Law? (capital L)

Thanks to the NIV for differentiating these two.

Basically a capital L indicates the Books of the Law, as opposed the law itself.
This sheds light on the fulfillment of the law in Matthew 5:17.

Matthew 5:17 NIV
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets;
I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

COMPARE - Jesus explains Matthew 5:17 (note "the Prophets" in verse 17 above)

Luke 24:44 NIV
He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you:
Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in
the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The law, God's law, Christ's law; three different things.

The Apostle differentiates between each one. Three different things.
He says he is not under the law, though he is not free from God's law,
but is under Christ's law. Three different things. See verse 21,

1 Corinthians 9:19-22 NIV
Though I am free and belong to no one,
I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible.
20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews.
To those under the law I became like one under the law
(though I myself am not under the law),
so as to win those under the law.
21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law
(though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law),
so as to win those not having the law.
22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak.
I have become all things to all people so that
by all possible means I might save some.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What's the difference between the law and God's law?

I see God's law as the law God gave us in our human conscience.
(which may be the ONLY positive outcome of the Fall)
The knowledge of good and evil.

This idea is definitely more obscure biblically.
Still, when weighed against the other evidence...

Romans 7:22 NIV
For in my inner being I delight in God’s law;

COMPARE - What law do those not having the law have?

Romans 2:14-16 NIV
(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law,
do by nature things required by the law,
they are a law for themselves,
even though they do not have the law.
15 They show that the requirements of the law
are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness,
and their thoughts sometimes accusing them
and at other times even defending them.)
16 This will take place on the day when
God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ,
as my gospel declares.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The law, the Law, God's law, Christ's law; four different things.

Agree, or disagree? Points outlined above. Thanks.

 

[Jack]

Observations about the law, the Law, God's law, Christ's law - four different things​

- What's the difference between the law and the Law? (capital L)

- What's the difference between the law and God's law?

- What's the difference between the law, God's law, and Christ's law?


The law, the Law, God's law, Christ's law; four different things.

Agree, or disagree? Points outlined below. Thanks.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What's the difference between the law and the Law? (capital L)

Thanks to the NIV for differentiating these two.

Basically a capital L indicates the Books of the Law, as opposed the law itself.
This sheds light on the fulfillment of the law in Matthew 5:17.

Matthew 5:17 NIV
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets;
I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

COMPARE - Jesus explains Matthew 5:17 (note "the Prophets" in verse 17 above)

Luke 24:44 NIV
He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you:
Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in
the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The law, God's law, Christ's law; three different things.

The Apostle differentiates between each one. Three different things.
He says he is not under the law, though he is not free from God's law,
but is under Christ's law. Three different things. See verse 21,

1 Corinthians 9:19-22 NIV
Though I am free and belong to no one,
I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible.
20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews.
To those under the law I became like one under the law
(though I myself am not under the law),
so as to win those under the law.
21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law
(though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law),
so as to win those not having the law.
22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak.
I have become all things to all people so that
by all possible means I might save some.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What's the difference between the law and God's law?

I see God's law as the law God gave us in our human conscience.
(which may be the ONLY positive outcome of the Fall)
The knowledge of good and evil.

This idea is definitely more obscure biblically.
Still, when weighed against the other evidence...

Romans 7:22 NIV
For in my inner being I delight in God’s law;

COMPARE - What law do those not having the law have?

Romans 2:14-16 NIV
(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law,
do by nature things required by the law,
they are a law for themselves,
even though they do not have the law.
15 They show that the requirements of the law
are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness,
and their thoughts sometimes accusing them
and at other times even defending them.)
16 This will take place on the day when
God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ,
as my gospel declares.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The law, the Law, God's law, Christ's law; four different things.

Agree, or disagree? Points outlined above. Thanks.

Stick with the New Covenant. It can pull you out of THE FIRE!