Law fulfilled by Christ

[Aviel]

Grace merely gave us something beyond the initial punishment of death.

God's Grace is Christ on the Cross.

You dont "do that".... as Grace is God'd GIFT., that is actually God's Mercy.

2 Corinthians 5:19

John 3:17

Notice......

1.) "The GIFT of Salvation"

2.) "The Gift of Righteousness"

3.) "The Gift of Eternal Life"


See those "Gifts"?


Welcome To : Salvation.

Its not something you do.

Its something you Receive by FAITH.,"without works or deeds of the law""

 

[timothyu]

Notice......

1.) "The GIFT of Salvation"

2.) "The Gift of Righteousness"

3.) "The Gift of Eternal Life"


See those "Gifts"?


Welcome To : Salvation.

Its not something you do.

Its something you Receive by FAITH.,"without works or deeds of the law""

Some say yippee, I'm saved. Now how else can I put my will ahead of God's and ahead of other people.

Yes the gift was the Kingdom to come, our possible salvation upon resurrection and judgment after paying the initial price of the first death. Resurrection and the Kingdom are a gift from God. We could not bring it about but we are responsible for what the outcome will be for ourselves, Kingdom or second death.

Yes Jesus fulfilled the Law by doing God's will not His own, which was required of Him to bring the Kingdom to fruition. When he did what was required of Him, He said it is finished and the Father carried on from there. We as humans have been told from front to back of the Bible to put His will ahead of our own. We rebel and those who keep rebelling will find no reward after resurrection. What they have taken here by their selfishness will be the only reward. No Kingdom for them.

And yes, we need to have faith this will be and God's promise is true (Jesus said truth only comes from the Father and not from the minds of man), however we are required to repent/change of the original sin, that is agree not to continually put our will ahead of the will of God, as stated all through the Bible. Our allegiance is to be to the Kingdom, not the adversarial world of man and the fallen elohim, for God considers our earthly ways to be backward to the Kingdom. So don't think nothing is required of us but faith alone. God does not want the same rebellious mentality in earth polluting His kingdom and that agreement and change must be made by us now. We are agreeing to an upgrade and must show by our fruits we are worthy and not just another fig true that will fail to produce figs.

Luke 16:15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.

James 1:27 Pure and undefiled religion before our God and Father is this: to care for orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

Romans 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

James 4:4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

 

[Aviel]

So don't think nothing is required of us but faith alone.

All God requires to give a person His Salvation that is the Sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross for your sin, is..

"Faith is counted (by God) as (Christ's) 'righteousness".

So, we give God our faith in Christ and God saves us because we did.

Now we are saved.

Now begins the walk of faith, and the process of growing in Grace.
We have Salvation, as its "The Gift of Salvation" that we have received....and now that we have it, we have to learn all about what it means to have become "a new Creation, in Christ".. Born again.

So, we go directly to Paul's Epistles, and we begin to learn "Church Doctrine" and so many more things from the "Apostle to the Gentiles".

We learn these verse below, by STUDY...and meditation.... as they will help established our heart with Grace and clarity regarding our Salvation and Faith.

Romans 3:21-28

Hebrews 13:9

2 Corinthians 5:19

John 3:17

Romans 4:8

 

[timothyu]

All God requires to give a person His Salvation that is the Sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross for your sin, is..

Yes, that opened the door to the Kingdom, previously unavailable. You'll notice that those who do not repent of their self serving ways will not gain access. His will, not ours is the way of the Kingdom and in earth if we have changed. That covers the rest of what you said.

 

[fhansen]

Jesus became, in a sense, a New Law, but not the Law of Moses. He preserved the Law while it remained in effect, but it was a Covenant that could be revoked. When Israel failed the Law, it was revoked. But it was revoke for everyone, by the plan of God.

So Jesus became a New Covenant, which we call the New Testament. The Law was abolished because its usefulness ended at the Cross.

The Old Law was never revoked. It was surpassed and made obsolete by a new and better Law, which fulfills it, the right way. The new covenant is not a reprieve from the obligation to be righteous but is the means to accomplishing that very thing in us. The primary difference between the old and new covenants is that, with the new, man is now with God, reconciled and united with Him. We become His people as, by faith, we accept Him as our God, reversing the rejection of and alienation from Him that Adam initiated for humanity. That's where salvation all begins, with that union. "Apart from Me you can do nothing"-John 15:5 That's how our righteousness can surpass that of the Pharisees and teachers of the law. Jesus is the Way; He reveals the true God so that we may know Him. The old covenant was a stepping stone to the new in that it taught us that we cannot be who we were created to be...apart from Him. Man was made for communion with God.

I will put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people. Jer 31:33

 

[RandyPNW]

The Old Law was never revoked. It was surpassed and made obsolete by a new and better Law, which fulfills it, the right way.

This appears to be a semantics issue. "Revoked?" "Made obsolete?" What's the difference?

The point I'm making is that God had an agreement with Israel--a contract. Israel broke that agreement completely when they rejected, as a nation, their Messiah. That's why the veil was rent. It was symbolic of the destruction of temple worship, and the covenant.

God never intended to keep the Law as such, even though we read in the Law that "this is for all your generations." It was, in fact, a Law to be enforced generation after generation. But the way it was imposed on Jesus' generation was by determining that the nation had defied the contract. They destroyed the agreement. That made the contract null and void, and God acknowledged that by ripping the veil from top to bottom.

The Law was not "the wrong way!" It was the right way in a time before redemption had been fully completed. It was right as a temporary measure prior to Christian redemption. Once Christ completed redemption, there was no need for temporary redemption. The Law was gone--however you wish to put it. I say "revoked." You say "made obsolete." In my book that's the same thing.

There were 2 issues to look at.
1) Israel failed to measure up to the agreement. That caused the Law to be revoked as a covenant.
2) The Law was only ever meant to be temporary and pre-Christian in terms of justification and redemption. That caused the Law to be updated or improved upon. The Law, at any rate, had to be replaced, thus revoking the previous agreement. If you don't like the word "revoke," fine. The Law *went away.*

The new covenant is not a reprieve from the obligation to be righteous but is the means to accomplishing that very thing in us.

The old agreement fell short, and was always understood to be as such, and only temporary in purpose. As such the final solution, which was an entirely new covenant, was, in fact, a "reprieve." It was refreshing to know that the endless work of temporary justification could finally end with final Justification.

The primary difference between the old and new covenants is that, with the new, man is now with God, reconciled and united with Him.

Israel was "with God" under the OT as well. It just didn't bring final Justification, or deliverance from death.

We become His people as, by faith, we accept Him as our God, reversing the rejection of and alienation from Him that Adam initiated for humanity. That's where salvation all begins, with that union. "Apart from Me you can do nothing"-John 15:5 That's how our righteousness can surpass that of the Pharisees and teachers of the law. Jesus is the Way; He reveals the true God so that we may know Him. The old covenant was a stepping stone to the new in that it taught us that we cannot be who we were created to be...apart from Him. Man was made for communion with God.

Jesus is the Word of God made flesh. And he existed as the Word prior to his Incarnation.

Therefore, God's word operated through the Law, as well, and was perfectly capable of being the virtue in the works of men. They only needed final redemption. They already had a relationship with God. God already operated in them by faith. You have an errant dichotomy between the OT and the NT.

I will put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people. Jer 31:33

That passage is a promise of fulfilling what had already been taking place without full redemption from death. While Israel remained not fully judged, sin would always creep back in and rob the nation of faith and God's presence. After judgment, Israel will be restored and finally obtain a better expression, a lasting expression, of national faith.

 

[fhansen]

This appears to be a semantics issue. "Revoked?" "Made obsolete?" What's the difference?

"Revoked" means that the covenant is no longer in effect, does not need to be fulfilled, "Made obsolete" means that it could not accomplish what it was meant to accomplish and is superseded by an improved covenant, that does fulfill it.

The point I'm making is that God had an agreement with Israel--a contract. Israel broke that agreement completely when they rejected, as a nation, their Messiah. That's why the veil was rent. It was symbolic of the destruction of temple worship, and the covenant.

It's been typically understood that the veil was rent because now, with the new covenant, direct access to God, into the Holy of Holies, has been made possible for the individual. And man has no justice without that direct relationship.

God never intended to keep the Law as such, even though we read in the Law that "this is for all your generations."

Just as God foreknew that Adam would break His command, He knew the Jews would do so as well. Both, however, were stepping stones to the goal He has for mankind. The law's real purpose was to demonstrate that, while the law is holy and good and right for man, man nonetheless cannot obey it on his own; he will fail, fail at living up to his own purpose.

Israel was "with God" under the OT as well. It just didn't bring final Justification, or deliverance from death.

Reconciliation with God, with Him dwelling within us IOW, did not happen until the Incarnation.

Jesus is the Word of God made flesh. And he existed as the Word prior to his Incarnation.

Therefore, God's word operated through the Law, as well, and was perfectly capable of being the virtue in the works of men. They only needed final redemption. They already had a relationship with God. God already operated in them by faith. You have an errant dichotomy between the OT and the NT.

Man needed more. The law could not accomplish it, which is why Paul as a Pharisee, even though he excelled at observance of the law, was not yet justified. He needed a new righteousness, apart from the law (Rom 3:21), that comes on the basis of faith (Phil 3:9), and not just lip-service or mere external observance. Redemption is intrinsically bound up with this right and just relationship with God.

That passage is a promise of fulfilling what had already been taking place without full redemption from death. While Israel remained not fully judged, sin would always creep back in and rob the nation of faith and God's presence. After judgment, Israel will be restored and finally obtain a better expression, a lasting expression, of national faith.

That's a new covenant quote applicable to all people. Rom 9 spells this out.

 

[timothyu]

Is it not an inconvenience to all these theories to have God's original law never change from the beginning to this day, that we are to put His will ahead of our own.. period. Why is man always trying to worm out from under that fact? All of creation has always revolved around that law. Jesus even simplified it and condensed it for the thick of mind and they still don't get it.

 

[fhansen]

Is it not an inconvenience to all these theories to have God's original law never change from the beginning to this day, that we are to put His will ahead of our own.. period. Why is man always trying to worm out from under that fact?

I agree. Generally speaking, we all recognize the need for grace. But some view grace as giving man a reprieve from his obligation to be righteous, and live accordingly, while others see grace as the authentic means to accomplishing that very thing.

 

[KevinT]

I have read all the posts on this thread, and thought I would join in.

• What is meant by "the law"? I think there are multiple meanings which can cause confusion during conversations.
  • The law as instruction in right living: God gave the 10 commandments from mount Sinai, and most people consider them to be good teaching. Don't covet your neighbor's wife? (Exodus 20) Yeah, that's an excellent idea. Don't eat something that you find dead in the forest? (Deut 14:21) That's just common sense. It will always be true, regardless of the coming Messiah.
  • The law as membership in God's special people: This was certainly true in the beginning. God's people should not be stealing, killing, or doing any of the other sorts of behavior that were common at the time the children of Israel were told to drive the other nations out. But with time it became only external formality--following only the letter of the law, and not the spirit of the law. Jesus addressed this, saying, "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others." (Matthew 23:23)
• Much of the teaching of the NT theology comes from Paul. Paul was God's chosen messenger to the Gentiles whom he hoped to help graft into the family of God's believers: "and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree..." (Rom 11:17)
  • Paul had to break down the walls that the Jews had built up to keep the Gentiles out. Gentiles had always been told, "Sure, you can join God's people. But first you must cut off a part of your penis and then solemnly promise to never break any of these 12,000 rules." Who would want that? It was an unfair and evil arrangement that kept all of God's other children blocked out.
  • So what did Paul say? In effect, "Don't worry about all those rules. Rules are not what matters. It is a willingness to follow God's leading that matters." He wanted to make it easy to come to God.
  • But did Paul then let the new believers do whatever they wanted? No, he started restating the same principles of order and propriety. Think about how Paul lambasted the guy who married his father's wife (1 Cor 5:1). He laid out in no uncertain language that followers of God will not behave in certain ways -- following the same principles as had been laid out all those years before to the Israelite slaves fleeing Egypt.
• So, one one sense, God did abolish the law:
  • No longer is circumcision (and all the other rules) a sign of membership of God's special people, and by extension, approval by God. (As an aside, however, it is still widely practiced by people irrespective of religion.)
  • Paul writes that Jesus "nailed" the law to the cross (Col 2:14)
  • God no longer seems to expect complete obedience as a first step following him. Instead He invites us to follow Jesus and let the Holy Spirit work on our hearts so that we may be enabled to follow His will.
• But in another sense, God can never abolish the law:
  • The instructions ("laws") that God gave are an extension of His character. He doesn't want people to murder each other. He never has, and He never will. Nothing that Jesus did changes this. When He told us not to covet, this was not some arbitrary command. It's not like telling everyone to wear a red shirt when a green could have done just as well. There is no other way that it can be and still turn out well.
  • Much of our modern scientific progress has come after researchers have carefully teased out and finally understood the laws of the universe. Albert Einstein figured out that mass and energy are interchangeable, as evidenced by his famous E-MC^2 formula. This is a law that God established. It doesn't change, and God also doesn't change. Here is an entire website listing all the texts showing that God doesn't change: What Does the Bible Say About God Doesnt Change?. One of my favorites is: For I the Lord do not change; therefore you ... are not consumed. (Mal 3:6) Imagine if God's law of gravity was intermittent, and one day it just stops working and we all float into space and die. The unchanging nature of God does keep us alive.

So that is the starting framework I start with. The difficulty comes with the details:

• The law of Moses states: When you build a new house, make a parapet around your roof so that you may not bring the guilt of bloodshed on your house if someone falls from the roof. (Deut 22:8) Seems like a good idea, but most house today don't have such a thing. Will God be upset if I don't add this to my house?
• The law of Paul says: "I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet." (1 Tim 2:11) What would he do if he lived in England when they were under Queen Elizabeth? Or if he met with the current US Vice President? Or what if he had lived in the OT under the leadership of Deborah, the 4th pre-monastic judge in Isreal? Is it possible that Paul wrote this because of unique circumstances he was in, and that God is not actually upset with an intelligent and effective female leader?

I think that ultimately, Jesus is our shepherd, leader and teacher. Sometimes He may guide us down a path towards the east, and sometimes to the south. And what He said 100 years ago may not be what He would say today. And then other things are unchanging and rock solid. I think, like the scientific researchers, we should try to carefully understand the principles that God is trying to teach, and not get lost in the details of things that no longer apply -- like the prohibition of wearing fabric woven from two materials (Deut 22:9)

What do you think?

Kevin