The Purpose of the Law

[Randy Kluth]

The purpose of the Law was to show Israel what righteousness was, so that they could do it, and also to show them they have a sin nature that needed final atonement. The Law showed Israel all that, and by extension, the whole world.

It is often thought, due to Paul's language, that the Law was given to show Israel they *could not* be righteous, that they were vile and sinful, and needed Christ to forgive them. But it was much more than that. God would not have given them the Law if they could not do it. It was a form of righteousness that they could do until their final redemption.

It's important that we grasp that the Law was given for the purpose of making Israel righteous while they awaited final redemption. But it did, as Paul said, show them that no matter how righteous they were, they had a sin nature, and needed a final atonement.

The Law just gave them a temporary means of atonement until final atonement could be made by Christ. But the Law always was a way to be righteous while waiting for that grand act to take place.

NW Randy

 

[CharismaticLady]

The purpose of the Law was to show Israel what righteousness was, so that they could do it, and also to show them they have a sin nature that needed final atonement. The Law showed Israel all that, and by extension, the whole world.

It is often thought, due to Paul's language, that the Law was given to show Israel they *could not* be righteous, that they were vile and sinful, and needed Christ to forgive them. But it was much more than that. God would not have given them the Law if they could not do it. It was a form of righteousness that they could do until their final redemption.

It's important that we grasp that the Law was given for the purpose of making Israel righteous while they awaited final redemption. But it did, as Paul said, show them that no matter how righteous they were, they had a sin nature, and needed a final atonement.

The Law just gave them a temporary means of atonement until final atonement could be made by Christ. But the Law always was a way to be righteous while waiting for that grand act to take place.

NW Randy

Because of the sin nature, the law was given to guide them, but they had to keep it in their own strength. Jesus came to take out our sin nature and put His Spirit in its place, making us reborn to partake of His divine nature. The divine nature has no desire to sin.

 

[justbyfaith]

No one can become righteous by keeping the law; that righteousness is as filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6).

The purpose of the Law is to show mankind that he is a sinner in need of a Saviour (Romans 3:20, Galatians 3:24, Psalms 19:7 (kjv)).

Rom 3:20, Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Gal 3:24, Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

Psa 19:7, The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.

 

[justbyfaith]

No doubt, @Randy Kluth, you will take advantage of my referencing Isaiah 64:6 in order to tout your own ideas on the subject; which are in fact a repudiation of that scripture.

It is, of course, wrong, to attempt to repudiate holy scripture.

 

[BloodBought 1953]

The purpose of the Law was to show Israel what righteousness was, so that they could do it, and also to show them they have a sin nature that needed final atonement. The Law showed Israel all that, and by extension, the whole world.

It is often thought, due to Paul's language, that the Law was given to show Israel they *could not* be righteous, that they were vile and sinful, and needed Christ to forgive them. But it was much more than that. God would not have given them the Law if they could not do it. It was a form of righteousness that they could do until their final redemption.

It's important that we grasp that the Law was given for the purpose of making Israel righteous while they awaited final redemption. But it did, as Paul said, show them that no matter how righteous they were, they had a sin nature, and needed a final atonement.

The Law just gave them a temporary means of atonement until final atonement could be made by Christ. But the Law always was a way to be righteous while waiting for that grand act to take place.

NW Randy

NewThe purpose of the Law was to show Israel what righteousness was, so that they could do it,

Ever wonder what the Polar opposite of Christianity would sound like?See the Above..... If one cares what The Bible actually says, The Purpose Of The Law was to show you that nobody can keep it.The Law is likened to a “ Schoolmaster” That reveals the “ need” for Jesus and grabs you by the Hand and takes you to Him... I hope those New to the Faith will completely ignore the Biblical ignorance on display in that Post....

 

[quietthinker]

Because of the sin nature, the law was given to guide them, but they had to keep it in their own strength. Jesus came to take out our sin nature and put His Spirit in its place, making us reborn to partake of His divine nature. The divine nature has no desire to sin.

I wonder??....about Abraham....justified by faith because his actions manifested that faith. Wasn't he reborn? as also all the Prophets?

I think driving a divide between the Old and Testaments on this point is not warranted.

God saves people....he saves them the same way irrespective of where they were born or what age they lived in. He saves them through forgiveness by faith in a substitute.

Because the reality of the substitute God had in mind was still future for Old Testament folk they were given symbols/metaphors/figures/types in lew of a valid substitute.

Let's take the lamb sacrifice....the passover. They were to pick the best young male without blemish on the 10th Day and keep it seperate from the flock....they took it into their own space for 4 days and cared for it. I can imagine them becoming familiar with this little lamb, almost like a pet...particularly for the children. Four days later on the 14th of the month they were required to cut it's throat and let it bleed to death. White fleece, red blood.
Could you cut your pet's throat?.....what emotions would traverse you?

The attachment was deliberate. It was to teach them several lessons stacked on top of each other. It was to teach them how God felt both for his Messiah and the horrific nature of sin. It was to teach them that killing something you love is shattering.....it was to teach them the high price of transgression.....it was to teach them that faith is what God desires; faith in a substitute....it was to teach them that this was no joke; that heart felt repentance coupled with faith would validate the symbol.

Was this repentance and faith without the Spirit?......I doubt it. Repentance and faith are evidence of God's Spirit.

 

[justbyfaith]

in lew of

spelled: in lieu of.

 

[quietthinker]

spelled: in lieu of.

thanks

 

[justbyfaith]

thanks

You're welcome brother.

 

[Brakelite]

I wonder??....about Abraham....justified by faith because his actions manifested that faith. Wasn't he reborn? as also all the Prophets?

I think driving a divide between the Old and Testaments on this point is not warranted.

God saves people....he saves them the same way irrespective of where they were born or what age they lived in. He saves them through forgiveness by faith in a substitute.

Because the reality of the substitute God had in mind was still future for Old Testament folk they were given symbols/metaphors/figures/types in lew of a valid substitute.

Let's take the lamb sacrifice....the passover. They were to pick the best young male without blemish on the 10th Day and keep it seperate from the flock....they took it into their own space for 4 days and cared for it. I can imagine them becoming familiar with this little lamb, almost like a pet...particularly for the children. Four days later on the 14th of the month they were required to cut it's throat and let it bleed to death. White fleece, red blood.
Could you cut your pet's throat?.....what emotions would traverse you?

The attachment was deliberate. It was to teach them several lessons stacked on top of each other. It was to teach them how God felt both for his Messiah and the horrific nature of sin. It was to teach them that killing something you love is shattering.....it was to teach them the high price of transgression.....it was to teach them that faith is what God desires; faith in a substitute....it was to teach them that this was no joke; that heart felt repentance coupled with faith would validate the symbol.

Was this repentance and faith without the Spirit?......I doubt it. Repentance and faith are evidence of God's Spirit.

Wounded in the house of my friends.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Wasn't he reborn?

No, he still had his nature, but His belief in God and obedience to God was accounted as righteousness. That is why Romans 3:25 said of these that God passed over the sins previously committed. That is also why the Israelites, even with the Law that could not make them actually righteous, had to sacrifice bulls and goats every year to cover their sins for one year, then had to do it all over again. The Law was to guard them UNTIL the main cause of man's problem - SIN - could be taken away, through Jesus. 1 John 3:5

 

[Randy Kluth]

NewThe purpose of the Law was to show Israel what righteousness was, so that they could do it,

Ever wonder what the Polar opposite of Christianity would sound like?See the Above..... If one cares what The Bible actually says, The Purpose Of The Law was to show you that nobody can keep it.The Law is likened to a “ Schoolmaster” That reveals the “ need” for Jesus and grabs you by the Hand and takes you to Him... I hope those New to the Faith will completely ignore the Biblical ignorance on display in that Post....

No, you're wrong and are ignoring the Bible completely on this! Do you not believe what Moses wrote on this?

Duet 30.11 Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. 12 It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, “Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 13 Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, “Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 14 No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.

Paul was explaining, in short form, that the purpose of the Law was *both* to provide righteousness to Israel and also to show that they were flawed in their observances. What this meant in a practical sense was that their righteousness, though truly righteous, was not eligible for eternal life. If only one sin had kept Adam and Even out of paradise and barred them from the tree of life, then all the righteousness of the Law, with just one sin, could keep Israel from eternal life.

The Law, therefore, was indeed to preserve Israel under the covenant in righteousness. Read Psalm 119. David would disagree with you whole-heartedly. So what did Paul really mean to say, that the Law was not righteous? No, he said the opposite.

You're misinterpreting what Paul means when he described the purpose of the Law as a prooftext for sin, to show their need for an eternal atonement. Paul was just explaining that the Law of Moses had been designed only to be a temporary covenant, pointing ahead to Christ.

It was designed to show the need for a final atonement, beyond righteousness and beyond temporal atonement. Righteousness had to attain to eternal life to be truly fulfilled. That's what Paul meant. To say that the Law was not about righteousness is about as absurd as it gets. And I would tell everyone not to listen to you, if you say it wasn't!

Matt 5.17 “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. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven."

 

[CharismaticLady]

I think driving a divide between the Old and Testaments on this point is not warranted.

It is extremely "warranted." There is a big difference in the Old and New Covenants. The Old was of the flesh, and the New is of the Spirit. The Old was the ministry of death, the New is the ministry of the Spirit. The Old was written on tablets of stone, the New is written on our hearts. The Old was represented by Ishmael, and the New was represented by Isaac.

28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. 29 But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now. 30 Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.” 31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free.

 

[Giuliano]

It is extremely "warranted." There is a big difference in the Old and New Covenants. The Old was of the flesh, and the New is of the Spirit. The Old was the ministry of death, the New is the ministry of the Spirit. The Old was written on tablets of stone, the New is written on our hearts. The Old was represented by Ishmael, and the New was represented by Isaac.

28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. 29 But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now. 30 Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.” 31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free.

One difficulty with your position is that the Law of Moses was given to the descendants of Isaac and not to the Ishmaelites.

 

[CharismaticLady]

One difficulty with your position is that the Law of Moses was given to the descendants of Isaac and not to the Ishmaelites.

It isn't my theory, but Paul's. Here is the whole context. It is unmistakable.

21 Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? 22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise, 24 which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar— 25 for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children— 26 but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all. 27 For it is written:

“Rejoice, O barren,
You who do not bear!
Break forth and shout,
You who are not in labor!
For the desolate has many more children
Than she who has a husband.”

28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. 29 But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now. 30 Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.” 31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free.

 

[Giuliano]

It isn't my theory, but Paul's. Here is the whole context. It is unmistakable.

21 Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? 22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise, 24 which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar— 25 for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children— 26 but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all. 27 For it is written:

“Rejoice, O barren,
You who do not bear!
Break forth and shout,
You who are not in labor!
For the desolate has many more children
Than she who has a husband.”

28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. 29 But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now. 30 Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.” 31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free.

How does it work? The Law of Moses was given to Israel, descended from Isaac. It was not given to Ishmael. That would make the Law of Moses a good thing, something given to the children of Isaac who were free. The people in bondage were not given that law.

 

[CharismaticLady]

How does it work? The Law of Moses was given to Israel, descended from Isaac. It was not given to Ishmael. That would make the Law of Moses a good thing, something given to the children of Isaac who were free. The people in bondage were not given that law.

Galatians 3:
19 What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed (Jesus) should come to whom the promise was made.

Don't forget Jesus came for Israel. Both covenants are for Israel. (Gentiles are grafted in). Now just focus on what Paul said about the covenants and Abraham. Flesh vs. Spirit.

Luke 2:34
34 Then Simeon blessed them, and said to Mary His mother, “Behold, this Child is destined for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign which will be spoken against.

 

[Giuliano]

Galatians 3:
19 What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed (Jesus) should come to whom the promise was made.

Don't forget Jesus came for Israel. Both covenants are for Israel. (Gentiles are grafted in). Now just focus on what Paul said about the covenants and Abraham. Flesh vs. Spirit.

Luke 2:34
34 Then Simeon blessed them, and said to Mary His mother, “Behold, this Child is destined for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign which will be spoken against.

It still doesn't come together to me. Israel transgressed, so they were given the Law? Ishmael and the Gentiles didn't transgress so they were never given the Law?

 

[Brakelite]

The Purpose of the Law... Which law?

 

[CharismaticLady]

The Purpose of the Law... Which law?

The Ten Commandments and all the other laws under the Old Covenant.

Because it was of the flesh, (just like going into Hagar and producing Ishmael was of the flesh, and not of the promise of God) it was named the ministry of death because it could not do anything about the sin in our old nature we were born with.

2 Corinthians 3:6-11
6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

7 But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, 8 how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious? 9 For if the ministry of condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness exceeds much more in glory. 10 For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels. 11 For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious.