The old covenant is it still for the unbelieving jews versus the new?

[Soyeong]

Strawman. . .

It's not about contradiction, it's about omission of the greater part of the subject.

It is not a strawman if you make me guess why you responded. The point that I was making is experience of living in obedience to the Torah is inherently connected with the concept of Jesus saving us from living in transgression of the Torah and while it is true that being saved from God's wrath for transgressing the Torah also inherently part of the concept of Jesus saving us from living in transgression of the Torah, that had nothing to do with point I was making, so I didn't bring mention it.

God's New Covenant people are not under the Old Covenant laws

In Deuteronomy 10:12-16, God instructed them to circumcise their hearts and obey the Torah. In Deuteronomy 30:1-8, it prophesies a time when Israel would return from exile, God would circumcise their hearts, and they would return to obedience to the Torah. In Ezekiel 36:26-28, it is speaking in regard to their return from exile and the New Covenant and says that God will take away our hearts of stone, give us hearts of flesh, and sent His Spirit to lead us to obey the Torah. Likewise, in Jeremiah 31:33, it is speaking in regard to the return from exile and the New Covenant by saying that God will put His Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts, so these verses are describing God circumcising our hearts, and the New Covenant is all about the return to obedience to the Torah, which is also quoted in Hebrews 8:10. In Romans 2:25-29, the way to recognize that a Gentile has a circumcised heart is by observing their obedience to the Torah and circumcision of the heart is by the Spirit, which is in contrast with Acts 7:51-53, where those with uncircumcised hearts resist the Spirit and refuse to submit to the Torah. In Romans 8:4-7, those who walk in the Spirit are contrasted with those who have minds set on the flesh who refuse to submit to the Torah. In Galatians 5:19-22, everything listed as works of the flesh that are against the Spirit are also against the Torah while all of the fruits of the Spirit are aspects of God's nature that are in accordance with it. In John 16:8, the Spirit has the role of convicting us of sin and the Torah is how God revealed what sin is (Romans 3:20, 1 John 3:4).

(Galatians 3:25; 1 Corinthians 9:21),
they are under Christ's law (Matthew 22:37-40), which is God's law for the New Covenant
(1 Corinthians 9:22), where love is counted as the law's fulfillment (Romans 13:8-10).

Christ did not come with the message to stop repenting because the law has ended, but just the opposite, so you use use Galatians 3:25 to undermine his ministry. In Galatians 3:26, it says that in Christ we are sons of God through faith, and in 1 John 3:4-10, those who do not practice righteousness in obedience to God's law are not sons of God, which completely undermines how you are trying to use that verse. In 1 Corinthians 9:21, Paul equated the Law of God with Law of Christ, so we are still to follow it under the New Covenant.

In Matthew 22:36-40, Christ was not asked to give his own law, but about which of God's laws was the greatest, and the reason why the commands to love God and our neighbor are the greatest two is because they are inclusive of all of God's other commandments, which is why he said that they all hang on them. If we love God and our neighbor, then we won't commit adultery, theft, murder, idolatry, rape, kidnapping, favoritism, and so forth for everything else that God has commanded, so that is why love is the fulfillment of the other commandments. If someone's obedience to the command to love is not inclusive of obedience to the command to help the poor, then they are not treating the command to love as being the fulfillment of the command to help the poor, and they have an incorrect understanding of what they are being commanded to do when they are commanded to love. In Matthew 24:12-14, Jesus said that because of lawlessness the love of many will grow cold, which completely undermines how you are trying to use Matthew 22:36-40.

 

[disciple Clint]

And I think you need to consider the verses that I cited affects your views. If you think that Hebrews 8-9 is clearly contradicts the verses that I cited and if you think that the Bible does not contradict itself, then you have a problem, but I do not think that Hebrews 8-9 is contrary to what I said, so I do not have a problem.

In Deuteronomy 10:12-16, God instructed them to circumcise their hearts and obey the Torah. In Deuteronomy 30:1-8, it prophesies a time when Israel would return from exile, God would circumcise their hearts, and they would return to obedience to the Torah. In Ezekiel 36:26-28, it is speaking in regard to their return from exile and the New Covenant and says that God will take away our hearts of stone, give us hearts of flesh, and sent His Spirit to lead us to obey the Torah. Likewise, in Jeremiah 31:33, it is speaking in regard to the return from exile and the New Covenant by saying that God will put His Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts, so these verses are describing God circumcising our hearts, and the New Covenant is all about the return to obedience to the Torah, which is also quoted in Hebrews 8:10. In Romans 2:25-29, the way to recognize that a Gentile has a circumcised heart is by observing their obedience to the Torah and circumcision of the heart is by the Spirit, which is in contrast with Acts 7:51-53, where those with uncircumcised hearts resist the Spirit and refuse to submit to the Torah. In Romans 8:4-7, those who walk in the Spirit are contrasted with those who have minds set on the flesh who refuse to submit to the Torah. In Galatians 5:19-22, everything listed as works of the flesh that are against the Spirit are also against the Torah while all of the fruits of the Spirit are aspects of God's nature that are in accordance with it. In John 16:8, the Spirit has the role of convicting us of sin and the Torah is how God revealed what sin is (Romans 3:20, 1 John 3:4).

It is important to consider context, which is why jumping around the Bible and taking one verse here and one there causes error. I have given you two chapters that support my view, read them in context. Paul clearly shows that the law (Torah) is not the source of our salvation, that it was given to show us how we cannot save ourselves and to provide a guide. Our salvation is based on faith again Paul makes that clear. Jesus reduced to law (Torah) to two verses Love the lord your God and Love your neighbor.

 

[Clare73]

It is not a strawman if you make me guess why you responded. The point that I was making is experience of living in obedience to the Torah is inherently connected with the concept of Jesus saving us from living in transgression of the Torah and while it is true that being saved from God's wrath for transgressing the Torah also inherently part of the concept of Jesus saving us from living in transgression of the Torah, that had nothing to do with point I was making, so I didn't bring mention it.



In Deuteronomy 10:12-16, God instructed them to circumcise their hearts and obey the Torah. In Deuteronomy 30:1-8, it prophesies a time when Israel would return from exile, God would circumcise their hearts, and they would return to obedience to the Torah. In Ezekiel 36:26-28, it is speaking in regard to their return from exile and the New Covenant and says that God will take away our hearts of stone, give us hearts of flesh, and sent His Spirit to lead us to obey the Torah. Likewise, in Jeremiah 31:33, it is speaking in regard to the return from exile and the New Covenant by saying that God will put His Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts, so these verses are describing God circumcising our hearts, and the New Covenant is all about the return to obedience to the Torah, which is also quoted in Hebrews 8:10. In Romans 2:25-29, the way to recognize that a Gentile has a circumcised heart is by observing their obedience to the Torah and circumcision of the heart is by the Spirit, which is in contrast with Acts 7:51-53, where those with uncircumcised hearts resist the Spirit and refuse to submit to the Torah. In Romans 8:4-7, those who walk in the Spirit are contrasted with those who have minds set on the flesh who refuse to submit to the Torah. In Galatians 5:19-22, everything listed as works of the flesh that are against the Spirit are also against the Torah while all of the fruits of the Spirit are aspects of God's nature that are in accordance with it. In John 16:8, the Spirit has the role of convicting us of sin and the Torah is how God revealed what sin is (Romans 3:20, 1 John 3:4).

Christ did not come with the message to stop repenting

Straw man. . .

because the law has ended, but just the opposite, so you use use Galatians 3:25 to undermine his ministry. In Galatians 3:26, it says that in Christ we are sons of God through faith, and in 1 John 3:4-10, those who do not practice righteousness in obedience to God's law are not sons of God, which completely undermines how you are trying to use that verse.

Or, for the sake of the Old Covenant law on which your theology is built, are you undermining the New Covenant law of Christ which counts as fulfillment of the Decalogue "and whatever other commandment there may be" (Romans 13:8-10), and from which bondage (slavery) to the law we have been set free (Galatians 5:1)?

The law was not given for righteousness (justification), for justification has always been by faith since Abraham (Genesis 15:6; Romans 4:3, Romans 4:5).
The law was given to show that one could not be righteous by law-keeping, because one could not keep it according to God's requirements.
The New Covenant is under new law (Matthew 22:37-41) which counts as fulfillment of the righteousness the Old Covenant law could not give because of the fault of the people (Hebrews 8:8).

We have new law in the New Covenant, it just doesn't fit your Old Covenant theology.

 

[Soyeong]

It is important to consider context, which is why jumping around the Bible and taking one verse here and one there causes error. I have given you two chapters that support my view, read them in context.

Me showing that the context of what multiple other books throughout the Bible say about the topic is something that supports my position, whereas you looking at a passage in isolation and interpreting it in a way that is contrary to what other books of the Bible say on the topic is what causes error. In Hebrews 8:10, the New Covenant involves God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts, so it is in support of my position.

Paul clearly shows that the law (Torah) is not the source of our salvation, that it was given to show us how we cannot save ourselves and to provide a guide. Our salvation is based on faith again Paul makes that clear.

While I agree that our salvation is based on faith, that does not mean that the Torah is not the source of our salvation because in Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that faith is one of the weightier matters of the Torah. The Torah can be obeyed for reasons other than trying to earn our salvation, so the fact that the Torah is not a source of earning our salvation as wage does not mean that the Torah is not the source of our salvation for some other reason, such as faith. In Romans 3:31, our faith does not abolish the Torah, but rather our faith upholds it, so only those who have faith will obey it and will be justified by the same faith, which is why Paul could say in Romans 2:13 that only doers of the Torah will be justified while denying in Romans 4:4-5 that we can earn our salvation as a wage. Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and the Torah is how the Israelites knew what sin is (Romans 3:20, 1 John 3:4), so living in obedience to it through faith is inherently part of the concept of Jesus saving us from living in transgression of it.

Jesus reduced to law (Torah) to two verses Love the lord your God and Love your neighbor.

In Matthew 22:36-40, Jesus was not asked to reduce which laws we should follow, but about which commandment was the greatest, and the existence of the greatest two commandments implies that there still exists other commandments that are not the greatest. All of the laws that God has given are examples of what it means to love God and to love our neighbor, which is why they can all be summed up as the greatest two commandments, and a sum is inclusive of all of its parts, just as the greatest two commandments are inclusive of all of God's other commandments, which is why Jesus said that they all hang on them. The greatest two commandments are a lot easier said than done, so thankfully God gave us all of His other commandments to paint us a picture of what it looks like to correctly obey them, and thankfully He sent Jesus as a sinless example to bless us by turning us from our wickedness by teach us how to correctly obey them (Acts 3:25-26). What Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 was just as true on the day that the law was given to Moses, so that in no way diminishes our need to obey God's other laws.

 

[Soyeong]

Straw man. . .

If your interpretation of Galatians 3:25 were correct, then we would expect Jesus to have gone around telling people that the law had ended and we should stop repenting, but he did not do that, and you instead interpret Galatians 3:25 in a way that undermines his ministry.

Or, for the sake of the Old Covenant law on which your theology is built, are you undermining the New Covenant law of Christ which counts as fulfillment of the Decalogue "and whatever other commandment there may be" (Romans 13:8-10), and from which bondage (slavery) to the law we have been set free (Galatians 5:1)?

In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant involves obeying the Torah, so saying that we should obey it under the New Covenant is by no means undermining it. What was said in Matthew 22:36-40 and Romans 13:8-10 was just as true on the day that the law was given to Moses, so it in no way changes or modifies the way to obey it. Christ spent his ministry teaching how to obey the Torah by word and by example, so that is the Law of Christ.

The reason that God saved the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt was not in order to put them under bondage to His Torah, but rather it is for freedom that God sets us free (Galatians 5:1), which completely undermines how you trying to use that verse.

[qquote]The law was not given for righteousness (justification), for justification has always been by faith since Abraham (Genesis 15:6; Romans 4:3, Romans 4:5).[/quote]

Straw man...

The law was given to show that one could not be righteous by law-keeping, because one could not keep it according to God's requirements.

This is your own made up theology that is not found anywhere in the Bible. On the contrary, in Deuteronomy 30:11-14, God said that His law is not too difficult for us to keep. Thinking that no one could keep it according to God's requirements would mean that God essentially gave the law for the goal of cursing His children, which is expressing an extremely negative view of God, when in reality His law was given for our own good in order to bless us. In 1 John 5:3, to love God is to keep His commandments, which are not burdensome, so claiming that no one could keep it according to God's requirements is denying that anyone has ever loved God and denying that His commandments are not burdensome. Furthermore, we have examples of people who did keep the law, such as in Joshua 22:1-3, Luke 1:5-6, and Philippians 3:5-6.

The New Covenant is under new law (Matthew 22:37-41) which counts as fulfillment of the righteousness the Old Covenant law could not give because of the fault of the people (Hebrews 8:8).

We have new law in the New Covenant, it just doesn't fit your Old Covenant theology.

Love fulfills the law because it is inclusive of all of the other laws, which is why Jesus said that all of the other laws hang on them, so they are all attached, and the moment you try to pick up just the greatest two commandments, all of the other commandments come with. Jesus was born under the law as a member of the Mosaic Covenant and he did not establish the New Covenant until his death, so the sum of everything that he taught during his ministry up until that point was in regard to how to correctly live as a member of the Mosaic Covenant, including Matthew 22:36-41.

Lastly, in regard to posts #7 and #15, it is noted that you have neglected to discuss any of the verses that I cited in support of my position to explain how my interpretation is wrong, and without doing that, you at most arguing that the verses that you have cited contradict the verse that I have cited.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

the old covenant is it --still for the unbelieving jews versus the new covenant for the church.

tried to edit title was unable sorry

As my friend Carl has said, the Old Covenant ended when the Temple curtain was ripped from top to bottom. It no longer exists for anyone. We have information in the Scriptures about it for our education only. Anyone who is still trusting in it is trusting in a covenant that has been cancelled and set aside.

 

[Soyeong]

As my friend Carl has said, the Old Covenant ended when the Temple curtain was ripped from top to bottom. It no longer exists for anyone. We have information in the Scriptures about it for our education only. Anyone who is still trusting in it is trusting in a covenant that has been cancelled and set aside.

Are the things that the Mosaic Covenant revealed to us about the eternal nature of who God is still true? Should we live in a way that testifies about what is true of God's nature?

While we are under the New Covenant and not the Mosaic Covenant, we are still under the same God with the same eternal nature and therefore the same laws for how to express, experience, believe in, and testify about His nature. For example, the way to act in accordance with God's righteousness is based on God's righteousness, not on any particular covenant, and God's righteousness is eternal, so any instructions that God has ever given for how to do what is righteous are eternally valid regardless of which covenant someone is under. Sin was in the world before the law was given (Romans 5:13), so there were no actions that became righteous or sinful when it was given, but rather it revealed what has always been and will always be the way to do that. For example, it was a sin to commit adultery in Genesis 39:9, long before the Mosaic Covenant was established, during it, and it remains sinful after it has become obsolete, and if God were to ever make a covenant where that were to change, then His righteousness would not be eternal.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Are the things that the Mosaic Covenant revealed to us about the eternal nature of who God is still true? Should we live in a way that testifies about what is true of God's nature?

While we are under the New Covenant and not the Mosaic Covenant, we are still under the same God with the same eternal nature and therefore the same laws for how to express, experience, believe in, and testify about His nature. For example, the way to act in accordance with God's righteousness is based on God's righteousness, not on any particular covenant, and God's righteousness is eternal, so any instructions that God has ever given for how to do what is righteous are eternally valid regardless of which covenant someone is under. Sin was in the world before the law was given (Romans 5:13), so there were no actions that became righteous or sinful when it was given, but rather it revealed what has always been and will always be the way to do that. For example, it was a sin to commit adultery in Genesis 39:9, long before the Mosaic Covenant was established, during it, and it remains sinful after it has become obsolete, and if God were to ever make a covenant where that were to change, then His righteousness would not be eternal.

Under the New Covenant, which is between the Father and His Son Jesus Christ (and not between God and us), the righteousness that we have is bestowed on us as a free gift. It is the pure righteousness of Christ and that is the way God sees us.

The New Covenant involves the Father making a covenant with the Son that He will save all those who put their faith and trust in the Son, the risen and glorified Jesus Christ. As part of the Covenant, Jesus has sent us the Holy Spirit in indwell us and to work within us to conform us to the image of Christ. Instead of us having to work at improving ourselves, we are His workmanship to enable us to the works that He has pre-ordained for us. It is not us through our own efforts, but as we maintain our faith and trust in Christ, the Holy Spirit does the work within us.

 

[SkyWriting]

It is important to consider context, which is why jumping around the Bible and taking one verse here and one there causes error. I have given you two chapters that support my view, read them in context. Paul clearly shows that the law (Torah) is not the source of our salvation, that it was given to show us how we cannot save ourselves and to provide a guide. Our salvation is based on faith again Paul makes that clear. Jesus reduced to law (Torah) to two verses Love the lord your God and Love your neighbor.

Often the meaning is not evident from a short passage and the context will illuminate the passage. Most often, various passages on a topic add depth and understanding.

Here is a good cross-reference tool.

 

[Soyeong]

Under the New Covenant, which is between the Father and His Son Jesus Christ (and not between God and us), the righteousness that we have is bestowed on us as a free gift. It is the pure righteousness of Christ and that is the way God sees us.

The New Covenant involves the Father making a covenant with the Son that He will save all those who put their faith and trust in the Son, the risen and glorified Jesus Christ. As part of the Covenant, Jesus has sent us the Holy Spirit in indwell us and to work within us to conform us to the image of Christ. Instead of us having to work at improving ourselves, we are His workmanship to enable us to the works that He has pre-ordained for us. It is not us through our own efforts, but as we maintain our faith and trust in Christ, the Holy Spirit does the work within us.

Righteousness has never been something that can be earned by our obedience as a wage, even through perfect obedience (Romans 4:4-5), so it has only ever been bestowed as a free gift. In Romans 3:21-22, the Law and the Prophets testify that the righteousness of God comes through faith in Christ for all who believe, so this has always been the one and only way of becoming righteous that is testified about. In Genesis 6:8-9, Noah found grace in the eyes of God and was a righteous man, so he was declared righteous by grace through faith in the same means as everyone else. In Psalms 119:29-30, David wanted God to put false ways far form him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey His law, and he chose the way of faithfulness, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith.

To say that someone has a character trait is to say that they are someone who chooses to take actions that express that character trait, so being bestowed with the gift of righteousness is being bestowed with the gift of becoming someone who chooses to take actions that express His righteousness, and the gift of God's law is His instructions for how to do that. A chip off the old block is someone who in the image of their father by having the same character or nature, and this is the sense that Jesus is the Son of God in that the Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact expression or image of God's nature (Hebrews 1:3), so he is the physical manifestation of the nature of God expressed through setting a sinless example of how to walk in obedience to God's law, so that is also the sense that we are children of God when we are partaking in the divine nature through following his example. Aspects of God's nature are the fruits of the Spirit, so that is why those who walk in the Spirit are children of God in contrast with those who have minds set on the flesh who refuse to submit to God's law (Romans 8:1-7), why those who do not practice righteousness in obedience to God's law are not children of God (1 John 3:4-10), and why the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey God's law (Ezekiel 36:26-27), which is the way that that the Spirit conforms us to the image of Christ.

When we put our trust in Christ, we are putting our trust in His nature for what to conform our lives to, and the way that we live express what we believe to be true about the nature of who he is. For example, when we do good works in obedience to God's law, we are expressing his goodness, we are growing in a relationship with him through gaining experiential knowledge of his goodness, we are believing in his goodness, and we are testifying about his goodness, which is why our good works bring glory to God (Matthew 5:16). So the way to put our faith in the Son is by obeying the law of which he is the living embodiment, which is why he said in Matthew 23:23 that faith is one of the weightier matters of the law. God is trustworthy, therefore His law is also trustworthy (Psalms 19:7), so to rely on God's law is to rely on God, and it doesn't even make sense for someone to think that relying on what God has instructed is instead about what we can accomplish through our own efforts.

 

[disciple Clint]

Me showing that the context of what multiple other books throughout the Bible say about the topic is something that supports my position, whereas you looking at a passage in isolation and interpreting it in a way that is contrary to what other books of the Bible say on the topic is what causes error. In Hebrews 8:10, the New Covenant involves God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts, so it is in support of my position.



While I agree that our salvation is based on faith, that does not mean that the Torah is not the source of our salvation because in Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that faith is one of the weightier matters of the Torah. The Torah can be obeyed for reasons other than trying to earn our salvation, so the fact that the Torah is not a source of earning our salvation as wage does not mean that the Torah is not the source of our salvation for some other reason, such as faith. In Romans 3:31, our faith does not abolish the Torah, but rather our faith upholds it, so only those who have faith will obey it and will be justified by the same faith, which is why Paul could say in Romans 2:13 that only doers of the Torah will be justified while denying in Romans 4:4-5 that we can earn our salvation as a wage. Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and the Torah is how the Israelites knew what sin is (Romans 3:20, 1 John 3:4), so living in obedience to it through faith is inherently part of the concept of Jesus saving us from living in transgression of it.



In Matthew 22:36-40, Jesus was not asked to reduce which laws we should follow, but about which commandment was the greatest, and the existence of the greatest two commandments implies that there still exists other commandments that are not the greatest. All of the laws that God has given are examples of what it means to love God and to love our neighbor, which is why they can all be summed up as the greatest two commandments, and a sum is inclusive of all of its parts, just as the greatest two commandments are inclusive of all of God's other commandments, which is why Jesus said that they all hang on them. The greatest two commandments are a lot easier said than done, so thankfully God gave us all of His other commandments to paint us a picture of what it looks like to correctly obey them, and thankfully He sent Jesus as a sinless example to bless us by turning us from our wickedness by teach us how to correctly obey them (Acts 3:25-26). What Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 was just as true on the day that the law was given to Moses, so that in no way diminishes our need to obey God's other laws.

As I said Paul makes it clear, We are saved by Faith and not by the Law or keeping of the law.

 

[Soyeong]

As I said Paul makes it clear, We are saved by Faith and not by the Law or keeping of the law.

Paul said in Romans 2:13 that only doers of the law will be justified while also denying in Romans 4:4-5 that we can earn our justification as a wage, so there must be a reason why our justification requires us to choose to be doers of the law other than in order to earn it as a wage, namely faith. So while Paul made it clear that we can't earn our justification as a wage even through perfect obedience, he did not speak against being justified by being doers of the law, but just the opposite, so please address this nuance.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Paul said in Romans 2:13 that only doers of the law will be justified while also denying in Romans 4:4-5 that we can earn our justification as a wage, so there must be a reason why our justification requires us to choose to be doers of the law other than in order to earn it as a wage, namely faith. So while Paul made it clear that we can't earn our justification as a wage even through perfect obedience, he did not speak against being justified by being doers of the law, but just the opposite, so please address this nuance.

You have missed that Paul said that no one is justified through the Law. What Paul actually said about being justified by being a doer of the Law is that righteousness can come only by keeping the Law perfectly without fault from youth up. Then he says that no one has ever been able to achieve it. He says that there is none righteous, no, not one. He says that the Law is good and holy, but it is the sinfulness of man that has made the Law of no effect for achieving righteousness. Maybe studying the whole of Romans instead of cherry-picking verses out of it may lead to a better understanding of the righteousness of Christ by faith.

 

[SkyWriting]

You have missed that Paul said that no one is justified through the Law. What Paul actually said about being justified by being a doer of the Law is that righteousness can come only by keeping the Law perfectly without fault from youth up. Then he says that no one has ever been able to achieve it. He says that there is none righteous, no, not one. He says that the Law is good and holy, but it is the sinfulness of man that has made the Law of no effect for achieving righteousness. Maybe studying the whole of Romans instead of cherry-picking verses out of it may lead to a better understanding of the righteousness of Christ by faith.

I've learned a lot by cherry-picking.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I've learned a lot by cherry-picking.

The last time I did any cherry picking was doing a school holiday job at a local cherry orchard when I was 17 years old.

 

[disciple Clint]

Paul said in Romans 2:13 that only doers of the law will be justified while also denying in Romans 4:4-5 that we can earn our justification as a wage, so there must be a reason why our justification requires us to choose to be doers of the law other than in order to earn it as a wage, namely faith. So while Paul made it clear that we can't earn our justification as a wage even through perfect obedience, he did not speak against being justified by being doers of the law, but just the opposite, so please address this nuance.

Once again you are taking one verse out of context because it supports your belief when if you read it in context you will find that Paul is making the point that following the law will not save anyone because for the Jew it would have been necessary to keep the law perfectly and no person can do that. He is supporting the fact that we must be saved by grace & faith and not by our works or following the law, which once again is works. Stop with the taking things out of context, read the entire chapter and the chapters before and after that chapter. If you get lost consult a bible commentary there are plenty available for free online.

 

[enoob57]

he did not speak against being justified by being doers of the law

Romans 3:20 (KJV)
[20] Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

 

[Minister Monardo]

the old covenant is it --still for the unbelieving jews versus the new covenant for the church.

tried to edit title was unable sorry

Simply shorten it. i.e.
Old Covenant:Still for Jews vs the New for the church
Hope this helps.

 

[Minister Monardo]

I edited the title for you.

Where? Still looks chopped.

 

[RDKirk]

The old covenant ended when the temple vail was rent from top to bottom by God.

And if not then, then certainly when the temple was destroyed, because without the temple Jews cannot perform sacrifices as atonement for sin.

It never was a covenant of salvation anyway, as salvation promises for all humanity were established through Abraham.

Yes, which is why the Rich Young Ruler, who could affirm that he fully kept the covenant, yet understood that something more was required to attain eternal life.