The Law Stands, it condemns us all.

[Soyeong]

It's not about being under the law, it is about us all being guilty of sin under the law.

The problem is sin.

We need a Savior from our sins.

People confuse the issue.

The problem was not that God's law was hard (Deuteronomy 30:11), but that our hearts were hard. God could solve this problem either by lowering His righteous standard so that sinning in transgression of His law was no big deal, or by causing us to obey His law so that we might meet its righteous standard, and God chose the latter (Romans 8:4) by giving us a heart of flesh and giving us the Spirit to cause us to obey His law (Ezekiel 36:26-27) and by writing his law on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33). We need a Savior from our sin, which is transgressing the law (1 John 3:4) so that we can be free to what is holy, righteous, and good in obedience to God (Romans 6:16), not a Savior from His instructions for how to do that. We should consider it a divine privilege to be able to obey God's law and delight in obeying it by faith as Paul and David did (Romans 7:22, Psalms 1:1-2). According to Romans 6:14 and Romans 6:8-9, the law that we are not under that has to do with sin and death no longer having dominion over us, so the law that we are not under is the law of sin and death, which Paul contrasted with the law of God and the law of the Spirit, which are essentially the same thing (Romans 7:21-Romans 8:2).

 

[ToBeLoved]

The problem was not that God's law was hard (Deuteronomy 30:11), but that our hearts were hard. God could solve this problem either by lowering His righteous standard so that sinning was no big deal, or by causing us to obey His law so that we might meet its righteous standard, and God chose the latter (Romans 8:4).

If the law was not hard, then why are we all guilty of sin under the law.

God could NOT have lowered the righteousness standard. God demands justice. God is just.

The Holy Spirit in us and the Word being written on our hearts is why we are able to now obey the law. It is not under our own strength, but God's.

 

[Soyeong]

If the law was not hard, then why are we all guilty of sin under the law.

God could NOT have lowered the righteousness standard. God demands justice. God is just.

I just made some edits to my last post, so you might have missed them. Deuteronomy 30:11 directly says that what he commanded them was not too hard, so there is no "if" about that. In 1 John 5:3, it says that the commands of God are not burdensome, so that is in agreement. As I said, the problem was not that the law was hard, but that our hearts are hard, and we are guilty of sin under the law because our hearts are hard and led us to transgress it. I am in agreement that lowering His righteous standard was not a real option, so the only real option was to cause us to obey His law, or in other words, to cause to be like Christ through following his perfect example of obedience to the law.

The Holy Spirit in us and the Word being written on our hearts is why we are able to now obey the law. It is not under our own strength, but God's.

I am in agreement, but the problem is that most Christian erroneously think that God's law has been done away with. God's law is based on His holy, righteous, and good character, so God could no more do away with His law that He could do away with His holiness, righteousness, and goodness.

 

[Razare]

If the law was not hard, then why are we all guilty of sin under the law.

The law is simple to keep, except that the underlying premise of keeping the law is pride.

And pride causes the grace of God to evaporate, so that what is simple to do becomes immediately impossible.

I once was working at work late, and sinning by working too much. The grace of God left me and I could no longer work. Even moving my limbs became difficult. It was supernatural.

This is what the law is like. Our inability to keep it is supernatural inability, meaning it is impossible, because it is impossible to do good apart from God who is good. Therefore, only a person living in faith and grace could ever keep the law... but if you're living in faith and grace, you're not subject to the law, since faith comes from love and is greater than the law.

The exception being Christ, who could legitimately obey the law by the greater laws of faith and love, yet fulfilling the ordinances to be the Messiah, where as David and others intentionally ignored the law and were justified in doing so because of faith and love.

 

[Soyeong]

The law is simple to keep, except that the underlying premise of keeping the law is pride.

And pride causes the grace of God to evaporate, so that what is simple to do becomes immediately impossible.

I once was working at work late, and sinning by working too much. The grace of God left me and I could no longer work. Even moving my limbs became difficult. It was supernatural.

I don't think God is supernaturally keeping us from obeying Him, but rather the impossibility stems from the hardness of our heart.

This is what the law is like. Our inability to keep it is supernatural inability, meaning it is impossible, because it is impossible to do good apart from God who is good. Therefore, only a person living in faith and grace could ever keep the law... but if you're living in faith and grace, you're not subject to the law, since faith comes from love and is greater than the law.

According to Titus 2:11-14, God's grace trains us in godliness and to renounce lawlessness, which is the opposite of causing us to not be subject to the law.

The exception being Christ, who could legitimately obey the law by the greater laws of faith and love, yet fulfilling the ordinances to be the Messiah, where as David and others intentionally ignored the law and were justified in doing so because of faith and love.

Faith and love has never justified disobedience to God, but rather if we love God, then we will obey His commands, and if we have faith in God about how we should live, then we will likewise obey His commands. Messiah set a perfect example of how to walk in obedience to the law, and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22), to walk in the same way that he walked (1 John 2:4-6), and to imitate him (1 Corinthians 11:1).

 

[SAAN]

Romans 2:13-15
13 For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

James 1:22
22 But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.

 

[ToBeLoved]

I just made some edits to my last post, so you might have missed them. Deuteronomy 30:11 directly says that what he commanded them was not too hard, so there is no "if" about that. In 1 John 5:3, it says that the commands of God are not burdensome, so that is in agreement. As I said, the problem was not that the law was hard, but that our hearts are hard, and we are guilty of sin under the law because our hearts are hard and led us to transgress it. I am in agreement that lowering His righteous standard was not a real option, so the only real option was to cause us to obey His law, or in other words, to cause to be like Christ through following his perfect example of obedience to the law.

I am in agreement, but the problem is that most Christian erroneously think that God's law has been done away with. God's law is based on His holy, righteous, and good character, so God could no more do away with His law that He could do away with His holiness, righteousness, and goodness.

The Law is not burdensome for those in Christ because we have His forgiveness. I think that you are mixing up the OT and NT, which are very different before and after the cross.

Paul makes it clear and so does Jesus Christ that under the law all are condemned and guilty. It is written how the New Covenant is BETTER than the Old Covenant. Jesus Himself said that. Jesus died for the New Covenant, so how can it not be better. This mixing and substantiation of the law is confusing, because Jesus had to conquer sin and the Law for atonement.

 

[ToBeLoved]

The law is simple to keep, except that the underlying premise of keeping the law is pride.

And pride causes the grace of God to evaporate, so that what is simple to do becomes immediately impossible.

I once was working at work late, and sinning by working too much. The grace of God left me and I could no longer work. Even moving my limbs became difficult. It was supernatural.

This is what the law is like. Our inability to keep it is supernatural inability, meaning it is impossible, because it is impossible to do good apart from God who is good. Therefore, only a person living in faith and grace could ever keep the law... but if you're living in faith and grace, you're not subject to the law, since faith comes from love and is greater than the law.

The exception being Christ, who could legitimately obey the law by the greater laws of faith and love, yet fulfilling the ordinances to be the Messiah, where as David and others intentionally ignored the law and were justified in doing so because of faith and love.

How is it not a contridiction to say keeping the law is not hard, yet no one can do it. No one in all of history.

 

[Soyeong]

The Law is not burdensome for those in Christ because we have His forgiveness. I think that you are mixing up the OT and NT, which are very different before and after the cross.

Paul makes it clear and so does Jesus Christ that under the law all are condemned and guilty. It is written how the New Covenant is BETTER than the Old Covenant. Jesus Himself said that. Jesus died for the New Covenant, so how can it not be better. This mixing and substantiation of the law is confusing, because Jesus had to conquer sin and the Law for atonement.

God has always been holy, righteous, and good, so He has always had such a conduct, and His law is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12) because it is His instructions for how to have such a conduct in line with His character. So the way to have such a conduct existed from the beginning and exists independently of any covenant, which means there is a distinction between God's law and a covenant agreement to obey God's law. I am in complete agreement that we are not under the Old Covenant, that the New Covenant is superior, and that we should not seek to go back under the Old Covenant, however, God's character did not change, so the laws based off of His character did not change, and indeed as part of the New Covenant, we are still told to have a holy, righteous, and good conduct (1 Peter 1:14-16, 1 John 3:10, Ephesians 2:10).

As Deuteronomy 30:11 states, what he commanded them was not too difficult, so the law was not burdensome because God never gave them burdensome laws in the first place. His goal was not to give them a heavy legalistic burden, but to set them free from bondage (Psalms 119:145). Jesus criticized the Pharisees for setting aside the commands of God to obey their own traditions (Mark 7:6-13) and he called their traditions a heavy burden (Matthew 23:3-4), so God's law can be perverted into that, but that was never the intention. In contrast, the way that Jesus taught to walk in obedience to the law by word and sinless example is the good way where we will find rest for our souls (Matthew 11:28-30, Jeremiah 6:16-19), and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22), to walk in the same way that he walked (1 John 2:4-6), to imitate him (1 Corinthians 11:1), and to be like him (Philippians 2:5).

God did not give inferior laws, 80% of His revealed plan of redemption was not defective, and in Romans 9:30-32 the Jews were not at fault for obeying what God had commanded them to do. Rather, God's law has always been meant to be obeyed by faith in a way that built a relationship between Him and His people, otherwise He would not have disdained it when His people outwardly obeyed His law while their hearts were far from Him (Isaiah 29:13). So the problem was that the Jews pursued the law legalistically as though righteousness were by works instead of pursuing the law as though righteousness were by faith, as the Gentiles were doing. God did not shift plans between the OT and NT, but rather when they are fully understood there is complete continuity between them. As is written in Amos 3:7, God does nothing that He has not first revealed to the prophets and in Acts 17:11, the Bereans checked everything Paul said against OT Scriptures to see if it was true. The NT writers quoted or alluded to the OT between around 2000-4000 times to show that what they said did not deviate from it, so if your interpretation of the NT is very different from what is written in the OT, then your interpretation is wrong.

 

[tzadik]

How is it not a contridiction to say keeping the law is not hard, yet no one can do it. No one in all of history.

Correct me if I'm wrong but does God state or command any one person to have perfect obedience to His commandments...ever?
God created His Law with provisions for when we sin. He knew that humans as flawed individuals would NEVER be able to perfectly obey His Word. "Keeping God's commandments, or being obedient to God's Law" is 100% not about perfectly/never missing/never sinning. God gives us clear instructions for what we should do when we go against any of His instructions.

The perfection argument comes when one tries to use their adherence or obedience to the Law as a method to earn or merit salvation. The ONLY way that one can be saved by keeping the law (and I know this is an oxymoron as it's impossible) is to have perfect obedience and never sin from birth to death.

Luke 1:5-6 is a perfect example God pointing out someone who is successfully keeping the Law of God. It's not that Zacharias and Elizabeth never sinned in their lives.

5. In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zacharias, of the division of Abijah; and he had a wife from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth.
6. They were both righteous in the sight of God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and requirements of the Lord.

 

[tzadik]

The Law is not burdensome for those in Christ because we have His forgiveness.

Can you tell me any one commandment in the Law of God that is "too hard to keep"?

I think we get so caught up with the generalization and our own negative inclinations of the English word "law" that makes us automatically assume something negative and restrictive.
The slight miss-definition of the Hebrew word Torah to the English word Law is unfortunate.
If we were to correctly define it as Instruction, even just that small change would allow us to perhaps start to better understand what God's "Torah" actually is about.

Paul makes it clear and so does Jesus Christ that under the law all are condemned and guilty.

And again it comes down to "what does it mean to be under the law"?

If you think that "being under the law" = being obedient to the Law of God (as a believer), then you would be basically saying that:
David was condemned and guilty when he delighted, loved and meditated on the Law of God. (Psalm 119, 1)
Paul was condemned and guilty while he was joyfully concurring with and serving the Law of God. (Romans 7:22,25)
Yeshua (Jesus) while he was on this earth living a life of obedience to the Law of God was condemned and guilty.
Basically anyone who lives a life in obedience to the commandments of God would be "condemned and guilty" under your interpretation of "under the law".
Being obedient, following, agreeing with or walking in accordance to the Law (Torah) of God as a believer is definitely not what Paul was referring to being "under the law". Just another misinterpretation mainly due to language. Very Unfortunate.

In fact to put it in perspective it is IMPOSSIBLE for a true believer to be "under the law".
As soon as we are born again of the Spirit, by grace through faith..our wages are no longer death, but eternal life.

 

[tzadik]

It is written how the New Covenant is BETTER than the Old Covenant.

And I think it's important to first understand:
What the old covenant is. What the new covenant is. And what the Scriptures tell us will be the difference.
Preferably starting with Jeremiah 31 or Hebrews 8.

First question I would have would be...is the Law (Torah) of God in the New Covenant going to be different than the Perfect, Holy, Righteous, True and Good Law (Torah) referenced throughout the Bible and especially in Jeremiah?

If your answer is yes - you'd have the burden of proof to show where in the texts God points this out and "what Law" will replace the perfect Law of God.

We are quick to throw blanket statements like "the new is better than the old", and "the law will now be written on our hearts" without taking the time to understand what Law is being talked about and all that the passage claims will come to pass.

Jesus Himself said that. Jesus died for the New Covenant, so how can it not be better. This mixing and substantiation of the law is confusing, because Jesus had to conquer sin and the Law for atonement.

To put your last statement in perspective...
Jesus had to conquer sin and the "Holy, Perfect, Righteous Law of God/Word of God/Commandments of God" so that we can be saved.

How does that statement make sense?
Why would God give us His Word, His Commandments, His Instructions, His Instruction Manual for believers, His moral code only to have His Son come and do away/nail it to the cross/abolish/destroy it to save us?

Is the problem with the Perfect Law of God?
Or is the problem with our sin and our hardened hearts?

 

[ToBeLoved]

God has always been holy, righteous, and good, so He has always had such a conduct, and His law is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12) because it is His instructions for how to have such a conduct in line with His character.

God's character did not change, you are correct.

But man's circumstances changed through Adam. So the fact that we are sinners changed our relationship with a holy, just and righteous God. So man (human beings) changed through Adam. That is why Jesus Christ had to undo what Adam did.

Romans 5:12-21
12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

15But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many. 16The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification. 17For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.

18So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. 19For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous. 20The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

 

[ToBeLoved]

So the way to have such a conduct existed from the beginning and exists independently of any covenant, which means there is a distinction between God's law and a covenant agreement to obey God's law. I am in complete agreement that we are not under the Old Covenant, that the New Covenant is superior, and that we should not seek to go back under the Old Covenant, however, God's character did not change, so the laws based off of His character did not change, and indeed as part of the New Covenant, we are still told to have a holy, righteous, and good conduct (1 Peter 1:14-16, 1 John 3:10, Ephesians 2:10).

From the beginning sin did not exist. Adam & Eve were with God in the garden.

Only after the apple, did sin exist. How can the law exist independently of any covenant if the law is what condemns man in sin? It is only because of sin that we are separated from God.

The Old Covenant was that the Law of Moses had to be obeyed perfectly. One sin convicts one of all sin under the Old Covenant.

I'm wondering how you can make that statement?

What two commandments did Jesus leave us with?

 

[ToBeLoved]

Can you tell me any one commandment in the Law of God that is "too hard to keep"?

Romans 5:18-20
18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. 19 For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous. 20 The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased,

 

[ToBeLoved]

Correct me if I'm wrong but does God state or command any one person to have perfect obedience to His commandments...ever?
God created His Law with provisions for when we sin. He knew that humans as flawed individuals would NEVER be able to perfectly obey His Word. "Keeping God's commandments, or being obedient to God's Law" is 100% not about perfectly/never missing/never sinning. God gives us clear instructions for what we should do when we go against any of His instructions.

The perfection argument comes when one tries to use their adherence or obedience to the Law as a method to earn or merit salvation. The ONLY way that one can be saved by keeping the law (and I know this is an oxymoron as it's impossible) is to have perfect obedience and never sin from birth to death.

Luke 1:5-6 is a perfect example God pointing out someone who is successfully keeping the Law of God. It's not that Zacharias and Elizabeth never sinned in their lives.

5. In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zacharias, of the division of Abijah; and he had a wife from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth.
6. They were both righteous in the sight of God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and requirements of the Lord.

So how does that prove that the Law was not hard to keep? That is what my question was when you wrote this reply.

 

[Soyeong]

From the beginning sin did not exist. Adam & Eve were with God in the garden.

Only after the apple, did sin exist. How can the law exist independently of any covenant if the law is what condemns man in sin? It is only because of sin that we are separated from God.

The Old Covenant was that the Law of Moses had to be obeyed perfectly. One sin convicts one of all sin under the Old Covenant.

I'm wondering how you can make that statement?

What two commandments did Jesus leave us with?

Indeed, sin had not yet entered the world, but the way to sin had to exist before Adam sinned, otherwise he couldn't have sinned. In other words, it has always been sinful to disobey God, even in a world where no one has yet disobeyed Him. The law exists independently of any covenant because the way to act in line with God's character exists independently of any covenant and the law is a codified revelation of God's character. For example, it is not like it wasn't a sin to murder people until God made the Mosaic covenant, but rather the law gives us knowledge of what things have always been sinful (Romans 3:20). Even if God had never made the Mosaic covenant, there would still exist a way to act in line with God's character, and there would still exist a way to sin by acting against God's character.

I think the fact that God commanded the sacrificial system implies that God was not expecting perfect obedience as part of the Mosaic covenant, though He was expecting His people to practice obedience and to practice repentance when they sinned. Abraham is the father of our faith and his faith in the promise is of central importance in the OT, and David was also justified by faith (Romans 4:1-8), so the way to become justified has always been only by grace through faith. If Moses was justified, then he was justified by faith before the law was given to him, so the law was not given for that purpose, but to instruct how those who have been justified how to live by faith according to God's will. God did not require the Israelites to obey His law before He would save them out of Egypt, but rather He saved them by faith first, then instructed them to obey His will. We are not to obey God's law in order to become saved, but because we have been saved.

Romans 5:18-20
18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. 19 For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous. 20 The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased,

Our flesh wants to do rebel against what we are told to do, but the goal was not given to cause us to rebel, but to cause grace to about. Strong's defines "grace" as "the divine influence upon the heart, and its reflection in the life", so the goal of giving the law was so that doing His will would abound. God's grace is what brings us salvation from doing what the law says is sin, trains us in godliness, and trains us to renounce lawlessness (Titus 2:11-14).

So how does that prove that the Law was not hard to keep? That is what my question was when you wrote this reply.

I'm not sure why you won't accept that Deuteronomy 30:11 directly says that what he commanded was not too difficult for them.

 

[BABerean2]

Can you tell me any one commandment in the Law of God that is "too hard to keep"?

When your wife says... "Honey does this dress make me look fat?"...

Will you lie or tell the truth?

.

 

[Soyeong]

When your wife says... "Honey does this dress make me look fat?"...

Will you lie or tell the truth?

.

When we are tempted to lie, the difficulty is not in the ability to tell the truth, but in the hardness of our heart.

 

[bugkiller]

The problem was not that God's law was hard (Deuteronomy 30:11), but that our hearts were hard. God could solve this problem either by lowering His righteous standard so that sinning in transgression of His law was no big deal, or by causing us to obey His law so that we might meet its righteous standard, and God chose the latter (Romans 8:4) by giving us a heart of flesh and giving us the Spirit to cause us to obey His law (Ezekiel 36:26-27) and by writing his law on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33). We need a Savior from our sin, which is transgressing the law (1 John 3:4) so that we can be free to what is holy, righteous, and good in obedience to God (Romans 6:16), not a Savior from His instructions for how to do that. We should consider it a divine privilege to be able to obey God's law and delight in obeying it by faith as Paul and David did (Romans 7:22, Psalms 1:1-2). According to Romans 6:14 and Romans 6:8-9, the law that we are not under that has to do with sin and death no longer having dominion over us, so the law that we are not under is the law of sin and death, which Paul contrasted with the law of God and the law of the Spirit, which are essentially the same thing (Romans 7:21-Romans 8:2).

Maybe you should read what you wrote. Yeah go ahead and ask me what's wrong with your post and why its unconvincing and unbelievable.

bugkiller