Have we done away with the law by means of faith?

[childeye 2]

This is one of the if not the main dilemma debated in James. Such can be seen at least back to Luther who did not like the epistle of James.

NKJ James 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?

Ah yes, thanks for this reminder @GDL and again thank you also for your prayers for me. I sense you already know the semantics at play.

I see James as putting forth an instructive semantical construct using the term "works" that are pointing to faith. For Abraham, believing God's promise would be fulfilled through Isaac, was therefore also believing that God could bring Isaac back to life. This application of the term "works" is qualified as of faith, and not "works" qualified as of the law.


Hebrews 11:17-19
17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,

18 Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called:

19 Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.

The question arises why would God test Abraham? Did God not already know what Abraham would do, or was this for the sake of the angels in heaven, or was it for the sake of Abraham, or for us, or for all or some of the above? For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. As you've said before this is not a one-way relationship.

 

[GDL]

I sense you already know the semantics at play.

I see James as putting forth an instructive semantical construct using the term "works" that are pointing to faith. For Abraham, believing God's promise would be fulfilled through Isaac, was therefore also believing that God could bring Isaac back to life. This application of the term "works" is qualified as faith and not "works" of the flesh nor "works" under the law.


Hebrews 11:17-19
17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,

18 Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called:

19 Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.

The question arises why would God test Abraham? Did God not already know what Abraham would do, or was this for the sake of the angels in heaven, or was it for the sake of Abraham, or for us, or for all the above? For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Actually, I don't see this as semantics. The Hebrews you quoted speaks of the "works" Abraham did in faith. That's how James categorizes the God commanded sacrifice of Isaac. This is the basis for James' Faith + Works argument.

God tests to prove faith. God tested Adam and the women in the Garden to prove and establish faith (or lack of it aka disobedience) in a state of innocence. So, faith and righteousness needed to be lived outwardly by faith before God would actually call men righteous. Surely God does know the outcome of a test, and the test is for our growth and to prove what God is doing in men on the earth. James begins his letter detailing what tests of faith accomplish in us, and again, James uses this test of Abraham for his example.

 

[childeye 2]

Actually, I don't see this as semantics. The Hebrews you quoted speaks of the "works" Abraham did in faith. That's how James categorizes the God commanded sacrifice of Isaac. This is the basis for James' Faith + Works argument.

Hmm. Semantics are the sentiments behind words, and sentiments are spirit. It's how I discern spirit. Hence God's Word come in the flesh is an expression of His Self.

We should therefore agree that Abraham's willingness to offer up his son was by faith rather than simply obeying the command. The distinction being that the work or energy spent obeying the command was secondary to the willingness to obey. For this faith of Abraham is described as having accounted that God could raise Isaac up from the dead, just as God had brought forth Isaac through promise. The willingness and faith therein were based on that reasoning as an impetus.

Here I note that Abraham's joining with the bondwoman was a "work" of trying to make God's promise come true by one's own carnal effort, which begat Ishmael. Wherefore scripture says, "But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise". I believe this sentiment would apply to Paul's meaning that no flesh will be justified by the works of the law.

God tests to prove faith. God tested Adam and the women in the Garden to prove and establish faith (or lack of it aka disobedience) in a state of innocence. So, faith and righteousness needed to be lived outwardly by faith before God would actually call men righteous. Surely God does know the outcome of a test, and the test is for our growth and to prove what God is doing in men on the earth. James begins his letter detailing what tests of faith accomplish in us, and again, James uses this test of Abraham for his example.

The incident in the garden is a different scenario and I don't believe God tested the man and the woman. However, I would say that sin and unrighteousness needed to be seen for what it is and how it leads to death, unto God's Glory. And I will add this, that faith comes by hearing and hearing comes by the Word of God.

 

[GDL]

We should therefore agree that Abraham's willingness to offer up his son was by faith rather than simply obeying the command. The distinction being that the work or energy spent obeying the command was secondary to the willingness to obey. For this faith of Abraham is described as having accounted that God could raise Isaac up from the dead, just as God had brought forth Isaac through promise. The willingness and faith therein were based on that reasoning as an impetus.

Abraham's offering of Isaac was by faith and by obedience to command. When God commands, a believer obeys by faith. When God commands, by faith a believer obeys. The 2 are inseparable when it comes to biblical faith in God.

Here I note that Abraham's joining with the bondwoman was a "work" of trying to make God's promise come true by one's own carnal effort, which begat Ishmael. Wherefore scripture says, "But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise". I believe this sentiment would apply to Paul's meaning that no flesh will be justified by the works of the law.

Abraham's work done with the bondwoman was by the flesh (carnal as you say), aka evil works.

But Abraham's offering of Isaac was a work done in faith obedience - aka faithfulness. James2:21 says Abraham's offering of Isaac was "works".

The incident in the garden is a different scenario and I don't believe God tested the man and the woman.

But you will acknowledge that what the Text says is not dependent upon your belief, correct? To make it clear, the same goes for me.

God commanded Adam in the Garden. Paul in Rom5:12-19 applies virtually every NC word correlated to sin - trespass, transgression, sin, disobedience - to Adam. When the Text deals with disobedience, it very typically deals with unbelief and vice-versa faith with obedience. Read Heb11 and note how beginning with Abel, virtually every name of man and women important to the historical record is said to have acted by faith. Abel acted by faith and Cain obviously did not and Cain is the first man to whom God spoke of "sin" by name. No faith, disobedience, sin.

I see warrant to say that Adam did not act by faith and this lack of faith and thus disobedience is what we're dealing with from Adam on.

Men have discussed the Garden for ages. The views I agree with speak of Adam and the woman being created in innocence. They were not righteous, nor unrighteous. Righteousness is by faith. Faith is intertwined with obedience as to be used synonymously in our Text. If God's command to Adam was not a test of faith-obedience, then what was it? Man's willful obedience in faith was to be proven for righteousness.

However, I would say that sin and unrighteousness needed to be seen for what it is and how it leads to death, unto God's Glory. And I will add this, that faith comes by hearing and hearing comes by the Word of God.

Certainly, but what is sin? What is transgression, trespass, disobedience if not an act of unbelief from the heart of a man? Did Adam not hear from the Word, from God, from the moment he was created and thereafter as he walked with God in the Garden? Did Adam not have way more reason than any man since to believe in his Creator? But his relationship with God was put to the test of willfully remaining in obedience to God which is also belief in God.

Yes, we apparently had to go through all mankind has gone and will yet go through to at the end of it all have a willingly, faithfully, obedient race of men in spiritual union with the God and Creator of all things. And, yes, it is all for God's glory and His children so just described will know and live by this and all of creation that did not accept Him by faith will also see His glory.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Am I right when I say that some of you think that Second Corinthians chapter Three teaches Christians that the Law is abrogated and hence no one need obey it because Christians have faith in Jesus Christ and that replaces obedience to the ten commandments?

2Corinthians 3:

1 You will say, perhaps, that we are making a fresh attempt to recommend ourselves to your favour. What, do we need letters of recommendation to you, or from you, as some others do?✻​

‘A fresh attempt’; St Paul must have been accused, or must have thought that he was being accused, of dwelling too much on what he had done for the Corinthians.​

2 Why, you yourselves are the letter we carry about with us, written in our hearts, for all to recognize and to read.​

3 You are an open letter from Christ, promulgated through us; a message written not in ink, but in the Spirit of the living God, with human hearts, instead of stone, to carry it.​

4 Such, through Christ, is the confidence in which we make our appeal to God.​

5 Not that, left to ourselves, we are able to frame any thought as coming from ourselves; all our ability comes from God,​

6 since it is he who has enabled us to promulgate his new law to men. It is a spiritual, not a written law; the written law inflicts death, whereas the spiritual law brings life.​

7 We know how that sentence of death, engraved in writing upon stone, was promulgated to men in a dazzling cloud, so that the people of Israel could not look Moses in the face, for the brightness of it, although that brightness soon passed away.​

8 How much more dazzling, then, must be the brightness in which the spiritual law is promulgated to them!​

9 If there is a splendour in the proclamation of our guilt, there must be more splendour yet in the proclamation of our acquittal;​

10 and indeed, what once seemed resplendent seems by comparison resplendent no longer, so much does the greater splendour outshine it.✻​

‘By comparison’; literally, ‘in this part’, i.e. this partial manifestation.​

11 What passed away passed in a flash of glory; what remains, remains instead in a blaze of glory.​

12 Such is the ground of our confidence, and we speak out boldly enough.​

13 It is not for us to use veiled language, as Moses veiled his face. He did it, so that the people of Israel might not go on gazing at the features of the old order, which was passing away.​

14 But in spite of that, dullness has crept over their senses, and to this day the reading of the old law is muffled with the same veil; no revelation tells them that it has been abrogated in Christ.​

15 To this day, I say, when the law of Moses is read out, a veil hangs over their hearts.✻​

vv. 5-15: St Paul compares the position of the Christian missionary, announcing the new law of life, that is, the Gospel, with that of Moses announcing to the Jews the old law, by which sinners are condemned. Moses received the law on tables of stone; the Gospel must be thought of as engraved upon men’s hearts. We are told in Ex. 34.29-35 that Moses’ face shone with an unearthly radiance after he had conversed with God on Mount Sinai; for a time, he had to wear a veil, because the Israelites could not bear to look on this brightness. How much more do the faces of Christ’s ministers shine with the reflection of his glory! But they do not throw any veil over the glory they have witnessed; they grow in likeness to Christ. It is the Jews who wear a veil over their faces, listening to the law of Moses sabbath after sabbath and never learning to see the glory of Christ revealed there.​

16 There must be a turning to the Lord first, and then the veil will be taken away.​

17 The Spirit we have been speaking of is the Lord; and where the Lord’s Spirit is, there is freedom.​

18 It is given to us, all alike, to catch the glory of the Lord as in a mirror, with faces unveiled; and so we become transfigured into the same likeness, borrowing glory from that glory, as the Spirit of the Lord enables us.✻​

vv. 17-18. Many different renderings have been given of these two verses, and it is perhaps impossible for us to ascertain the exact sense in which St Paul wrote them. It is not certain, in the Greek, whether ‘catch’ means ‘catch sight of’, or ‘reflect’.​

 

[GDL]

Am I right when I say that some of you think that Second Corinthians chapter Three teaches Christians that the Law is abrogated and hence no one need obey it because Christians have faith in Jesus Christ and that replaces obedience to the ten commandments?

2Corinthians 3:

1 You will say, perhaps, that we are making a fresh attempt to recommend ourselves to your favour. What, do we need letters of recommendation to you, or from you, as some others do?✻​

‘A fresh attempt’; St Paul must have been accused, or must have thought that he was being accused, of dwelling too much on what he had done for the Corinthians.​

2 Why, you yourselves are the letter we carry about with us, written in our hearts, for all to recognize and to read.​

3 You are an open letter from Christ, promulgated through us; a message written not in ink, but in the Spirit of the living God, with human hearts, instead of stone, to carry it.​

4 Such, through Christ, is the confidence in which we make our appeal to God.​

5 Not that, left to ourselves, we are able to frame any thought as coming from ourselves; all our ability comes from God,​

6 since it is he who has enabled us to promulgate his new law to men. It is a spiritual, not a written law; the written law inflicts death, whereas the spiritual law brings life.​

7 We know how that sentence of death, engraved in writing upon stone, was promulgated to men in a dazzling cloud, so that the people of Israel could not look Moses in the face, for the brightness of it, although that brightness soon passed away.​

8 How much more dazzling, then, must be the brightness in which the spiritual law is promulgated to them!​

9 If there is a splendour in the proclamation of our guilt, there must be more splendour yet in the proclamation of our acquittal;​

10 and indeed, what once seemed resplendent seems by comparison resplendent no longer, so much does the greater splendour outshine it.✻​

‘By comparison’; literally, ‘in this part’, i.e. this partial manifestation.​

11 What passed away passed in a flash of glory; what remains, remains instead in a blaze of glory.​

12 Such is the ground of our confidence, and we speak out boldly enough.​

13 It is not for us to use veiled language, as Moses veiled his face. He did it, so that the people of Israel might not go on gazing at the features of the old order, which was passing away.​

14 But in spite of that, dullness has crept over their senses, and to this day the reading of the old law is muffled with the same veil; no revelation tells them that it has been abrogated in Christ.​

15 To this day, I say, when the law of Moses is read out, a veil hangs over their hearts.✻​

vv. 5-15: St Paul compares the position of the Christian missionary, announcing the new law of life, that is, the Gospel, with that of Moses announcing to the Jews the old law, by which sinners are condemned. Moses received the law on tables of stone; the Gospel must be thought of as engraved upon men’s hearts. We are told in Ex. 34.29-35 that Moses’ face shone with an unearthly radiance after he had conversed with God on Mount Sinai; for a time, he had to wear a veil, because the Israelites could not bear to look on this brightness. How much more do the faces of Christ’s ministers shine with the reflection of his glory! But they do not throw any veil over the glory they have witnessed; they grow in likeness to Christ. It is the Jews who wear a veil over their faces, listening to the law of Moses sabbath after sabbath and never learning to see the glory of Christ revealed there.​

16 There must be a turning to the Lord first, and then the veil will be taken away.​

17 The Spirit we have been speaking of is the Lord; and where the Lord’s Spirit is, there is freedom.​

18 It is given to us, all alike, to catch the glory of the Lord as in a mirror, with faces unveiled; and so we become transfigured into the same likeness, borrowing glory from that glory, as the Spirit of the Lord enables us.✻​

vv. 17-18. Many different renderings have been given of these two verses, and it is perhaps impossible for us to ascertain the exact sense in which St Paul wrote them. It is not certain, in the Greek, whether ‘catch’ means ‘catch sight of’, or ‘reflect’.​

What translation are you using?

v.7 the ministration/administrative function of death which had been carved in letters in stone - OC Law, the 10C had an administrative function of death
v.8 the ministration/administrative function of the Spirit - the NC Gospel and Law of Christ
v.9a assuming glory in the ministration/administrative function of the condemnation/judicial verdict involving a penalty - OC Law, the 10C had an administrative function of issuing verdict with penalty
v.9b the ministration/administrative function of righteousness - the NC Gospel and Law of Christ for the New Man in Christ in Spirit
v.11 the thing which is abolished (OC Law - incl. the 10C - that administered death and condemnation with penalty) vs. the thing which remains (NC Gospel and Law of Christ administration of the Spirit and righteousness).

So, the answer to your question is, yes, Paul here and elsewhere says we are not under Mosaic Law. But this does not mean that we can live in sin. It is rather the new administration of the Spirit that will enable us to overcome sin. Focusing on doing the Ten Commandments is to place ourselves back into the old administration of penalty and death. NKJ Galatians 2:19 "For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God. To live to/for God we had to die to Law. If we want to live Law, then we cannot live to God.

The concept of breaking OC Law into categories and making part of OC Law lasting is a man-made concept that began with the Early Church Fathers and progressed to Aquinas and to Calvin. So, yes, there are some who see this as error. Our focus is not OC 10C morality but NC Spirituality which is far greater and the only way to actually live to God. In this era in Christ in Spirit, the OC Law is obsolete and vanished (Heb8:13) and invalid for the Christian (1Tim1:9a). It is now to be used by the Christian lawfully (1Tim1:8) with all Scripture for instruction in righteousness (2Tim13:18), but it was made for sinners of all types which are contrary to sound teaching according to the Gospel (1Tim1:9-11).

Time to live in and focus on the much more glorious administration of the Spirit and Righteousness in faithful obedience to Jesus Christ. If you desire to see what Law has always been in place, consider the Law of Faith and that anything not of faith is sin.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

What translation are you using?

A good one.

Knox Bible.

 

[GDL]

A good one.

Knox Bible.

Thanks. Looks like it has an interesting history. I didn't care for some of the 2Cor you posted, but looked at some other Scriptures on-line and can see his approach.

 

[childeye 2]

Abraham's offering of Isaac was by faith and by obedience to command. When God commands, a believer obeys by faith. When God commands, by faith a believer obeys. The 2 are inseparable when it comes to biblical faith in God.

Suffice it to say that it's illogical to go against someone you trust. I agree that faith and obedience are inseparable when it comes to a command from God according to the True Image of God, The Eternal power. But not according to any imagery of the eternal power invented out of darkness by the creature.

For the purpose of maintaining spiritual discernment, I'm saying that faith precedes obedience, so that obedience can be seen as a subset of faith, recognizing that faith itself is dependent upon the precept that God is trustworthy. It's also true that faith can grow through obedience since I see that faith comes with knowledge of God from God.

Wherefore scripture says that Abraham had accounted that, as the Eternal power, God could raise Isaac from the dead just as God had brought forth Isaac through promise and this is how he received Christ in a figure. It's therefore logical for me to assume he would not have received that figure if he obeyed out of fear of punishment for example or even a sense of duty.

Why is this distinction important when discerning spirit? Because it's possible to obey the law out of vainglory and mistake it as faithfulness, which is emblematic of what we call sucking-up to improve one's own stature in one's own eyes and the eyes of others. Wherefore, Jesus spoke of how the Pharisees cleaned the outside of the cup and that they were as sepulchers painted white but in reality, full of dead men's bones. And we can also see how that Lucifer, a guardian cherub of high stature with much knowledge, became enamored with himself which is discernable in the way he talked and judged others (see Job).

With this in mind I can also see two forms of righteousness spoken of below.
2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.

3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.

4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

Abraham's work done with the bondwoman was by the flesh (carnal as you say), aka evil works.

For the purpose of clarity, I said carnal effort and I did not mean to imply evil works. Perhaps I should have just said his own effort. The point is, I don't see the intention of wanting God's promise to come true qualifying his actions as an act of willful unbelief. As I see it Abraham, not unlike Adam, was experiencing doubt involuntarily and it moved him to listen to his wife who in turn was being moved by her own feelings of inadequacy.

But Abraham's offering of Isaac was a work done in faith obedience - aka faithfulness. James2:21 says Abraham's offering of Isaac was "works".

But James would know Abraham's works were not works of the law which makes the command to offer up Isaac a separate issue from the letter of the law. Despite the words denoting that Abraham's offering was works, James is not contesting that faith is the impetus of the works even when he says without works faith is dead.

But you will acknowledge that what the Text says is not dependent upon your belief, correct? To make it clear, the same goes for me.

If you mean that scripture is not subject to anyone's private interpretation, that is correct. The issue here is that I don't believe God was testing the man and the woman because the scripture does not show that.

God commanded Adam in the Garden. Paul in Rom5:12-19 applies virtually every NC word correlated to sin - trespass, transgression, sin, disobedience - to Adam. When the Text deals with disobedience, it very typically deals with unbelief and vice-verse faith with obedience. Read Heb11 and note how beginning with Abel, virtually every name of man and women important to the historical record is said to have acted by faith. Abel acted by faith and Cain obviously did not and Cain is the first man to whom God spoke of "sin" by name. No faith, disobedience, sin.

Scripture points to the devil too not just Adam:

1 John 3:8
8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

John 8:44
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Hebrews 2:14
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

With that in mind, I would point out that God warned Adam that he would die if he ate of the fruit. That is to say God explained to Adam why he was not to eat of it. And that is also to say it was not a command without its reasons which convey that God was looking out for Adam's best interests. As long as that Image of God held sway, Adam would have conviction to believe and not eat of the tree. We also see Eve telling the serpent that God had said they were not even to touch it lest they die. It is therefore possible that Eve may have been repeating to the serpent what Adam had told her God had said and Adam had added the don't touch part.

In regard to Cain, I would point out that God spoke of sin as something/someone outside wanting to get in when God saw that Cain was sulking over his offering not being respected. It is not dissimilar to Christ knocking at the door of the heart of a sinner, or the adversary the devil as a lion seeking whom he may devour.

I see warrant to say that Adam did not act by faith and this lack of faith and thus disobedience is what we're dealing with from Adam on.

That's a logical statement but it still excludes the precept of a trustworthy image of God. The scriptures show that the serpent deceived Eve by subtly presenting an alternative image of god, along with the strong persuasive conviction that the serpent knew more than she did. I figure that Eve was unable to honestly claim that she nor Adam knew better than the serpent and her conviction was compromised.

I don't see how scripture implies God was testing mankind's faith. Scripture indicates that Adam was persuaded/listened to the woman over his own judgment. Personally, I have pondered Adam's malleable vulnerability to the woman and compared it with my own when dealing with concerns over my wife's image of me. Anyway, it's conceivable that Eve first touched the fruit cautiously and seeing she didn't die as she had been led to believe, she then took the next step and proceeded to taste it. It's also possible she ate first and upon Adam seeing that she did not die he began to experience doubt in his own conviction for the first time. In whatever way the doubt proceeded I prefer to believe Adam ate reluctantly, inwardly not wanting to believe God would lie to them.

Men have discussed the Garden for ages. The views I agree with speak of Adam and the woman being created in innocence. They were not righteous, nor unrighteous. Righteousness is by faith. Faith is intertwined with obedience as to be used synonymously in our Text. If God's command to Adam was not a test of faith-obedience, then what was it? Man's willful obedience in faith was to be proven for righteousness.

I think innocence should be qualified as a form of ignorance, as in without knowledge of good and evil. The terms righteous/unrighteous imply judgment of character to beings made in God's Image, so rather than saying they were neither righteous or unrighteous, I would instead think they did not make personal judgements nor ponder being judged personally. Being made in God's image implies they were pure of heart in their innocence finding nothing wrong in their nakedness, whereas with the knowledge of good and evil they then began to find fault in themselves.

Scripture indicates they began in faith trusting God that they would die if they ate. To me they began as righteous, as in right with God. They probably walked by that tree many times never considering God could be unfaithful to them. Scripture does not indicate that God's command was a test of their faith. Scripture states God's intention was to protect them from harm rather than to create an occasion to stumble.

And there's another reason for me to not believe God would test their persons. God knows they are living souls and God is not vain nor subject to vanity. For God knows He exists Eternal and does not change according to the creature's approval or disapproval. Wherefore if anyone distrusts Him, they are deceived while He remains the same. Scripture indicates that the serpent initiated the chain of events, speaking vanity to the innocent which then led to the occasion for disobedience to occur. For which reason I feel we should be ascertaining how faith can be undermined through unknowingly accepting a corrupt and vain image of god.

Certainly, but what is sin? What is transgression, trespass, disobedience if not an act of unbelief from the heart of a man?

The term transgression is a term that makes me think of the law. Transgression, trespass, disobedience, are all similar as actions, whereas unbelief implies unconvinced or cynical. Overall, I see the term sin as both an action and a condition qualified as in separation from God to which there are degrees.

Did Adam not hear from the Word, from God, from the moment he was created and thereafter as he walked with God in the Garden? Did Adam not have way more reason than any man since to believe in his Creator?

I would not characterize the circumstance as Adam having more reason to believe than any other man. I say this not because I have not considered it but because I find myself forming a judgment of Adam that does not foster humility in me. And since I have the Holy Spirit given to me to convict me of my own sin such judgment will only end in hypocrisy. Yes, Adam heard God's Word, and it caused him to walk in faith. Suffice it to say the serpent was cunning and I doubt Adam and Eve could be fooled again.

But his relationship with God was put to the test of willfully remaining in obedience to God which is also belief in God.

The test of willfully remaining in obedience? With all due respect I humbly submit that's word play. The fact that the relationship between God and mankind began in Trust, and not distrust is circumstantial. If the devil wanted to test mankind, it was out of his own vanity (see Job). Since God Himself doesn't change in Character according to Adam's belief or unbelief, to lie to the gullible simply proves they're gullible.

2 Corinthians 11:3
But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

 

[biblelesson]

Except that saint Paul says that we establish the Law. And he adds that it is the doers of the law who are justified before God. Saint James notes that we are justified by works and not by faith alone; so, we rightly state and we rightly conclude that we are justified by faith and deeds and not by faith without deeds.

You misunderstand what James is saying. The deeds James is speaking of are the deeds of the gospel, not the deeds of the law.

This scripture explains the type of works shown as a result of faith:

James 2:25 KJV
Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?

You should now be able to see James is not talking about the works of the law, but how we show our faith based on actions as a result of what we believe.

Do we believe in Christ? Then we follow the gospel of Christ and do what it says. The “faith” of the gospel is what establishes the law.
Establish means: to make firm or stable; to cause to grow and multiply; to confirm, make fast, strengthen. So, it is by the “faith” of the gospel of Christ which establishes the law, thereby establishing the justification of the law, and as such, we no longer resort to the old covenant laws because we have the new covenant which establishes, confirm, make fast, strengthens the old, through faith.

Our actions/works determine our faith - which James is talking about.

Example of actions: Suppose you had two employees where one was lazy and one was a good worker; and one promotional opportunity. Which one will you promote? Based on the employee’s “works” you can determine which one is justified to be promoted.

Compare two spouses under a marriage covenant. One is abusive and unloving, one is not. Which one has kept the marriage covenant? Based on how one spouse treats the other you determine their “works” as to being justified - having not broken the covenant.

Your “works” are the “actions” that show proof of your faith!

Other scriptures to consider in James to explain James 2:26 KJV
James 2:14-16 KJV
14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?

James 2:14 KJV is about “works” being the evidence of faith!


I hope you can see James is not talking about keeping the law!

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

You misunderstand what James is saying. The deeds James is speaking of are the deeds of the gospel, not the deeds of the law.

The distinction is hair splitting, the good works that the Lord calls his saints to perform are wholly consistent with and fully expressive of the moral laws in the old testament.

 

[timothyu]

Those of the Kingdom focus on caring about others rather than making everything about take what I want self.

 

[biblelesson]

The distinction is hair splitting, the good works that the Lord calls his saints to perform are wholly consistent with and fully expressive of the moral laws in the old testament.

True, so what’s the problem with understanding that James 2:15-16 KJV, James 2:26 KJV, James 2:25 KJV, and even James 2:1-4 KJV are all consistent with the moral law - which shows our faith if we operate by those “works” in James? In addition to many other works through faith the gospel of Christ points out?

Why can’t you see this?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

True, so what’s the problem with understanding that James 2:15-16 KJV, James 2:26 KJV, James 2:25 KJV, and even James 2:1-4 KJV are all consistent with the moral law - which shows our faith if we operate by those “works” in James? In addition to many other works through faith the gospel of Christ points out?

Why can’t you see this?

Scripture treats faith as a verb, thus by faith the saints did things, great things, so faith cannot exist without acting. By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he was commended as righteous, God commending him by accepting his gifts. And through his faith, though he died, he still speaks. By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death, and he was not found, because God had taken him. Now before he was taken he was commended as having pleased God. And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him. By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, in reverent fear constructed an ark for the saving of his household. By this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith. By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God. By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised.

 

[biblelesson]

Scripture treats faith as a verb, thus by faith the saints did things, great things, so faith cannot exist without acting. By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he was commended as righteous, God commending him by accepting his gifts. And through his faith, though he died, he still speaks. By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death, and he was not found, because God had taken him. Now before he was taken he was commended as having pleased God. And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him. By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, in reverent fear constructed an ark for the saving of his household. By this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith. By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God. By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised.

These acts of faith is from Hebrews. Apostle Paul used these acts of faith as an example to explain what type of faith we are to have under the New Testament. Although those Paul used as an example of faith in Hebrews, none of the examples are saying we are justified by working the law. We are justified by faith, Romans 5:1 KJV

Pay good attention to these verses:

Hebrews 12:18-25 KJV

OLD COVENANT/OLD TESTAMENT LAWS
18 For ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest,
19 And the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words; which voice they that heard intreated that the word should not be spoken to them any more:
20 (For they could not endure that which was commanded, And if so much as a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned, or thrust through with a dart:
21 And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake

NEW COVENANT/LAW OF LIBERTY

22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
25 See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven:

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

These acts of faith is from Hebrews. Apostle Paul used these acts of faith as an example to explain what type of faith we are to have under the New Testament. Although those Paul used as an example of faith in Hebrews, none of the examples are saying we are justified by working the law. We are justified by faith, Romans 5:1 KJV

Pay good attention to these verses:

Hebrews 12:18-25 KJV

OLD COVENANT/OLD TESTAMENT LAWS
18 For ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest,
19 And the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words; which voice they that heard intreated that the word should not be spoken to them any more:
20 (For they could not endure that which was commanded, And if so much as a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned, or thrust through with a dart:
21 And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake

NEW COVENANT/LAW OF LIBERTY

22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
25 See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven:

I read your post, and it is friendly in its own way, but I just do not see any substance in the arguments presented in it.

 

[biblelesson]

Except that saint Paul says that we establish the Law. And he adds that it is the doers of the law who are justified before God. Saint James notes that we are justified by works and not by faith alone; so, we rightly state and we rightly conclude that we are justified by faith and deeds and not by faith without deeds.

These acts of faith is from Hebrews. Apostle Paul used these acts of faith as an example to explain what type of faith we are to have under the New Testament. Although those Paul used as an example of faith in Hebrews, none of the examples are saying we are justified by working the law. We are justified by faith, Romans 5:1 KJV

Pay good attention to these verses:

Hebrews 12:18-25 KJV

OLD COVENANT/OLD TESTAMENT LAWS
18 For ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest,
19 And the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words; which voice they that heard intreated that the word should not be spoken to them any more:
20 (For they could not endure that which was commanded, And if so much as a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned, or thrust through with a dart:
21 And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake

NEW COVENANT/LAW OF LIBERTY

22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
25 See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven:

I read your post, and it is friendly in its own way, but I just do not see any substance in the arguments presented in it.

Your post above argues that “Paul
said we establish the law, and adds that it is the doers of the law who are justified before God.” You then pointed out that “James notes that we are justified by works and not by faith alone;”. You concluded that “we are justified by faith and deeds and not by faith without deeds.”

So from your post, and back and forth discussions, I take it that you are saying we are to keep the law of Moses and/or the Royal law. This is why during our last discussion I listed Hebrews 12:18-25 KJV to show the differences in the laws under the old covenant and under the new covenant.

What Apostle Paul is telling us in Hebrews 12:18-25 KJV is the mount was inhabited by a dreadful God, where the old covenant laws were given, and He would kill you in an instant if you even touched the mountian - except for Moses the mediator and Aaron the priest. So when you touch any one of the laws given from that mount, you are touching that dreadful God, on that dreadful mount, who will kill you for touching His laws without abiding by every requirement the law demands. The God Who inhabited that mountain did not offer grace; He offered punishment for breaking His laws. God set the structure up with Moses where the only way the sins of the people were overlooked, a blood sacrifices had to be offered for each sin, for every law broken. However through Jesus, Who is our mediator and high priest, God does not hold us to the requirement of the law that He gave on the mount, nor does He uphold the required punishment for breaking one of His laws anymore, because Jesus Has released us from the dreadfulness of God’s righteousness that demands punishment and death for sin.

So you have to be really honest with yourself. If you are saying our faith requires works also, which those works are to keep the law of Moses or the royal law, then;

1) If you live by any of those laws and break one, you now have committed a sin and have put yourself under the requirements of the law. And the requirements for breaking a law is death. Once you break one of the law, once, twice, three times, where is your sacrifice, considering Jesus removed us from the requirement of the law and confirmed it by nailing it to the cross. If you keep the law and break even one, you are on your own, without Christ. This scripture relates:
Hebrews 10:26-31 KJV
26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
30 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.
31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

So if Jesus removed from the requirement of the law, then we are not required to keep it, and we don’t have to be fearful of Hebrews 10:26-31 KJV. You are a well educated person; ask yourself, why keep a law where there are no requirements? Does that make since to you?

Regarding your other post. I will add comments.

You said: “Except that saint Paul says that we establish the Law.” This is very true. What Paul in Romans 3:31 KJV, is saying is “faith” is the mechanism whereby the law is established now under the new covenant. Whereas before works was the mechanism. “Faith” became the mechanism which would establish the righteous of the law when God made a covenant with Abraham. Under Abraham, righteousness was imputed unto him because of his faith, and as such, God ordained that based on that same “type of faith” righteousness would be imputed on us when we believe in Christ, in the gospel of Christ. God establish faith as a prerequisite for salvation over 400 years before He established the laws on the mount.

So it was always to be about faith without the keeping/works of the laws. The law was temporary until the promised seed - Jesus Christ.

You said: “And he adds that it is the doers of the law who are justified before God.” True again. What Paul is saying in Romans 2:13 KJV is that the demands of the law is for the law to be kept, and only those who are the doers of the law, or who keep the law are justified. If the law is not kept, or if a person is not a doer of the law, then they face the condemnation of the law. What Paul is doing is making a case for salvation in Jesus Who saved us from the curse of the law; from condemnation because of our sins. Paul has already said all have sinned and come short of the glory of God, Romans 3:23 KJV; so none of us are doers of the law and are not justified; so if all have sinned, and if for every sin there must be death, then how do we all get from under that death sentence? Jesus! Jesus is the entire law - the entire law given to Moses was the essence (for lack of a better word) of Jesus, the law pointed to Jesus - Jesus has fulfilled the whole law, and in his body and blood that He sacrificed for us; our believing on Him covers us from the law requirements, covers us from the law punishments, thereby voiding out our need to keep it. We must understand the salvation path for us through the gospel of Christ under the New Testament now!

You said: “Saint James notes that we are justified by works and not by faith alone; so, we rightly state and we rightly conclude that we are justified by faith and deeds and not by faith without deeds.” James epistles is part of the group of epistles written that make up the gospel of Christ. James is not talking about the law requirement, he is talking about the gospel requirement. The works or deeds James is talking about relate to proof of sincerity. For example, if we say we believe in the gospel of Christ, and the gospel tells us we are to love our fellow man, we are to show love towards all, that is to the beggar as well as to the rich. If we are not impartial, our “works” of faith fail. Faith does not stand without proof of sincerity of what we believe - proving our works. If we say we are Christian, our actions/work determine whether we are justified in Christ to be called Christian. This is what James is saying.

 

[hislegacy]

Romans 3:21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.​

​

27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith. 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law. 29 Or is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also, 30 since there is one God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.​

​

Eph 2:4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.​

​

All one has to do is read the Scriptures -

Romans 4:6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:​

​

Romans 11:6 And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work.​

​

Gal 2:16 knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.​

​

​

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Your post above argues that “Paul
said we establish the law, and adds that it is the doers of the law who are justified before God.” You then pointed out that “James notes that we are justified by works and not by faith alone;”. You concluded that “we are justified by faith and deeds and not by faith without deeds.”

So from your post, and back and forth discussions, I take it that you are saying we are to keep the law of Moses and/or the Royal law. This is why during our last discussion I listed Hebrews 12:18-25 KJV to show the differences in the laws under the old covenant and under the new covenant.

What Apostle Paul is telling us in Hebrews 12:18-25 KJV is the mount was inhabited by a dreadful God, where the old covenant laws were given, and He would kill you in an instant if you even touched the mountian - except for Moses the mediator and Aaron the priest. So when you touch any one of the laws given from that mount, you are touching that dreadful God, on that dreadful mount, who will kill you for touching His laws without abiding by every requirement the law demands. The God Who inhabited that mountain did not offer grace; He offered punishment for breaking His laws. God set the structure up with Moses where the only way the sins of the people were overlooked, a blood sacrifices had to be offered for each sin, for every law broken. However through Jesus, Who is our mediator and high priest, God does not hold us to the requirement of the law that He gave on the mount, nor does He uphold the required punishment for breaking one of His laws anymore, because Jesus Has released us from the dreadfulness of God’s righteousness that demands punishment and death for sin.

So you have to be really honest with yourself. If you are saying our faith requires works also, which those works are to keep the law of Moses or the royal law, then;

1) If you live by any of those laws and break one, you now have committed a sin and have put yourself under the requirements of the law. And the requirements for breaking a law is death. Once you break one of the law, once, twice, three times, where is your sacrifice, considering Jesus removed us from the requirement of the law and confirmed it by nailing it to the cross. If you keep the law and break even one, you are on your own, without Christ. This scripture relates:
Hebrews 10:26-31 KJV
26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
30 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.
31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

So if Jesus removed from the requirement of the law, then we are not required to keep it, and we don’t have to be fearful of Hebrews 10:26-31 KJV. You are a well educated person; ask yourself, why keep a law where there are no requirements? Does that make since to you?

Regarding your other post. I will add comments.

You said: “Except that saint Paul says that we establish the Law.” This is very true. What Paul in Romans 3:31 KJV, is saying is “faith” is the mechanism whereby the law is established now under the new covenant. Whereas before works was the mechanism. “Faith” became the mechanism which would establish the righteous of the law when God made a covenant with Abraham. Under Abraham, righteousness was imputed unto him because of his faith, and as such, God ordained that based on that same “type of faith” righteousness would be imputed on us when we believe in Christ, in the gospel of Christ. God establish faith as a prerequisite for salvation over 400 years before He established the laws on the mount.

So it was always to be about faith without the keeping/works of the laws. The law was temporary until the promised seed - Jesus Christ.

You said: “And he adds that it is the doers of the law who are justified before God.” True again. What Paul is saying in Romans 2:13 KJV is that the demands of the law is for the law to be kept, and only those who are the doers of the law, or who keep the law are justified. If the law is not kept, or if a person is not a doer of the law, then they face the condemnation of the law. What Paul is doing is making a case for salvation in Jesus Who saved us from the curse of the law; from condemnation because of our sins. Paul has already said all have sinned and come short of the glory of God, Romans 3:23 KJV; so none of us are doers of the law and are not justified; so if all have sinned, and if for every sin there must be death, then how do we all get from under that death sentence? Jesus! Jesus is the entire law - the entire law given to Moses was the essence (for lack of a better word) of Jesus, the law pointed to Jesus - Jesus has fulfilled the whole law, and in his body and blood that He sacrificed for us; our believing on Him covers us from the law requirements, covers us from the law punishments, thereby voiding out our need to keep it. We must understand the salvation path for us through the gospel of Christ under the New Testament now!

You said: “Saint James notes that we are justified by works and not by faith alone; so, we rightly state and we rightly conclude that we are justified by faith and deeds and not by faith without deeds.” James epistles is part of the group of epistles written that make up the gospel of Christ. James is not talking about the law requirement, he is talking about the gospel requirement. The works or deeds James is talking about relate to proof of sincerity. For example, if we say we believe in the gospel of Christ, and the gospel tells us we are to love our fellow man, we are to show love towards all, that is to the beggar as well as to the rich. If we are not impartial, our “works” of faith fail. Faith does not stand without proof of sincerity of what we believe - proving our works. If we say we are Christian, our actions/work determine whether we are justified in Christ to be called Christian. This is what James is saying.

Apologies, but that post is very long, too long for me to read this morning (it is 05:10 here). I thank you for the effort you put into creating it. I will skip further reply because I read only a part of it before deciding it was just too long.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised man if he learns to believe, and the Gentile because he believes. Does that mean that we are using faith to rob the law of its force? No, we are setting the law on its right footing. ... You see, then, that it takes deeds as well as faith if a man is to be justified.

The law is not gone, it is in its right place. We are indeed justified by faith and we are justified by works, as the scriptures say (Romans 3:28, James 2:24)

The Law was our tutor until we came to Christ. It was there to show us our sin, and that we need a Saviour. Once we receive Christ and have the indwelling Holy Spirit, the Law has fulfilled its purpose and has been replaced,