Galatians 4 two opposing covenants.

[Studyman]

As in Ge 3:15, Dt 19:15 18-19, the Pentateuch, prophets and psalms.

As Jesus Himself says "And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."

 

[Studyman]

With respect for you as a sibling in Christ, I'm not reading all of what you say that includes inferences or statements that I don't understand the Gospel or certain Scripture; For example, your suggestion that I may not understand Galatians 3 is hard to take seriously when you are suggesting we need to go all over Scripture to first understand what Paul is saying in a phrase in a certain context in a certain document.

If you're going to prove that I'm wrong about what transgressions are referred to in Gal3:19, or what "works of law" means in Gal3 where it is repeated 3 times after being used in Gal2, then you're going to have to focus on Galatians before we run around the rest of the Bible. You're going to have to get into some specifics I don't see you liking to get into.

What initially interested me in some of what I read you say, was something I wanted to chase back into Hebrews to see how it might work out. I came out of Heb7 in agreement with what you said about the "fleshly commandment" there, but I already had that point of view because the language and syntax agree with you, as does some basic cross referencing in Scripture. There's some more I want to look at in Hebrews, but did not do so, since this thread ventured elsewhere.

Because I've seen you disregard specifics within some of the Text and err in the specifics making them say what you want them to say to fit your overall theory about Law, I really do not want to chase the overall forest apart from the trees. Neither transgressions nor works of law are just about sacrificing goats.

I prefer to stick with Scriptures in times like these. As Paul does when HE is promoting the truth of God. And truly he and the Lord's Christ Himself, went all over the Scriptures, promoting God's Truth. I'm not sorry that I follow their examples or instruction regarding Study.

As Paul teaches.

2 Tim. 3: 13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. 14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; 15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

And the Jesus of the Bible Himself promotes. It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

I would only say, so your foundation regarding me is not based on falsehood, as the preachers of Christ's Time did to Jesus and Paul.

That I never said, implied or suggested that "Transgressions nor works of the Law as just about sacrificing goats".

Nevertheless, I am still glad you asked me about my Faith, and gave me the opportunity to share what the Scriptures have shown me.

Thanks again.

 

[GDL]

I prefer to stick with Scriptures in times like these. As Paul does when HE is promoting the truth of God. And truly he and the Lord's Christ Himself, went all over the Scriptures, promoting God's Truth. I'm not sorry that I follow their examples or instruction regarding Study.

As Paul teaches.

2 Tim. 3: 13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. 14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; 15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

And the Jesus of the Bible Himself promotes. It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

I would only say, so your foundation regarding me is not based on falsehood, as the preachers of Christ's Time did to Jesus and Paul.

That I never said, implied or suggested that "Transgressions nor works of the Law as just about sacrificing goats".

Nevertheless, I am still glad you asked me about my Faith, and gave me the opportunity to share what the Scriptures have shown me.

Thanks again.

Your implication that the rest of us do not pursue the Scriptures for truth is rejected. We're not Jesus or Paul who spoke and wrote Scripture. And we're working to understand them in context first. You're frequently bypassing this step. No one is telling you to not use all Scripture. I'm asking you to first explain Paul in context because I think you're not understanding him before you jump into all Scripture.

IMO you did narrowly focus on the golden calf incident as the transgressions for which the law was added, and you did narrowly apply works of law to justification through sacrifices conducted by the Levitical Priesthood.

If you are able to provide a coherent simple statement about your "Faith," I'd like to ask you about a couple of your earlier posts - #185 & #187 (linked here for convenience):

In #185 I asked you if you mean that the phrase "works of [the] law" applies only to the sacrifices > Your answer is "In the Context of Paul's use of it, it applied to "Works of the Law" for "Justification"' > then with Scripture references, as I read you, you explain this "Works of the Law" for "Justification" as follows (I'm going to paraphrase you to pick up your points as I read them. Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding you). I'm going to be more literal than the KJBible re: its translation "deeds":​

• Rom2:5-6 God will judge and recompense every man according to his works
• Rom2:7 Those who endure in good work will [be recompensed] with eternal life
• You say this is essentially the Gospel found in the Law and the Prophets & you reference Ezek18:30 as a proof text.

I'm going to pause here to ask you for some clarification before proceeding with the rest of #185 and then #187:

• How does Jesus Christ fit into this "Works of the Law for "Justification"?
• Were Zacharias, Simeon, Anna able to do "Works of the Law for "Justification"?

​

 

[Studyman]

Your implication that the rest of us do not pursue the Scriptures for truth is rejected. We're not Jesus or Paul who spoke and wrote Scripture. And we're working to understand them in context first. You're frequently bypassing this step. No one is telling you to not use all Scripture. I'm asking you to first explain Paul in context because I think you're not understanding him before you jump into all Scripture.

IMO you did narrowly focus on the golden calf incident as the transgressions for which the law was added, and you did narrowly apply works of law to justification through sacrifices conducted by the Levitical Priesthood.

Yes, that is your opinion.

If you are able to provide a coherent simple statement about your "Faith," I'd like to ask you about a couple of your earlier posts - #185 & #187 (linked here for convenience):

Since I am only a sibling in Christ, as you have already judged, it is doubtful that anything I say, or understanding I share, will be considered by you as "coherent". After all, you are an ordained paster, having superior knowledge of Greek and study methods. Given your "self-professed" status, how could any disagreement I might have with you, be even considered? In truth, it won't. Nevertheless, as I did from the onset, I will answer your questions again.

In #185 I asked you if you mean that the phrase "works of [the] law" applies only to the sacrifices > Your answer is "In the Context of Paul's use of it, it applied to "Works of the Law" for "Justification"' > then with Scripture references, as I read you, you explain this "Works of the Law" for "Justification" as follows (I'm going to paraphrase you to pick up your points as I read them. Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding you). I'm going to be more literal than the KJBible re: its translation "deeds":​

• Rom2:5-6 God will judge and recompense every man according to his works
• Rom2:7 Those who endure in good work will [be recompensed] with eternal life
• You say this is essentially the Gospel found in the Law and the Prophets & you reference Ezek18:30 as a proof text.

Since you are "Paraphrasing", it seems prudent to point out who says what.

Rom. 1: 6 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. (Hab. 2:4, found in the Law and Prophets) 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

So it isn't me who is saying where the Gospel of Christ is found, it is Paul. I simply believe him.

I'm going to pause here to ask you for some clarification before proceeding with the rest of #185 and then #187:

• How does Jesus Christ fit into this "Works of the Law for "Justification"?

He didn't fit into the "works of the Law" the Pharisees, and their fathers before them, were promoting for Justification. That was the problem.

Is. 43: 22 But thou hast not called upon me, O Jacob; but thou hast been weary of me, O Israel. 23 Thou hast not brought me the small cattle of thy burnt offerings; neither hast thou honoured me with thy sacrifices. I have not caused thee to serve with an offering, nor wearied thee with incense. 24 Thou hast bought me no sweet cane with money, neither hast thou filled me with the fat of thy sacrifices: but thou hast made me to serve with thy sins, thou hast wearied me with thine iniquities. 25 I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins. 26 Put me in remembrance: let us plead together: declare thou, that thou mayest be justified.

The religion they promoted wasn't about HIM, even though HE Pleaded with them through the Prophets, but it was about their Priesthood in which all their power, their wealth and their fame came from.

• Were Zacharias, Simeon, Anna able to do "Works of the Law for "Justification"?

So as is my custom, lets hear what the Scriptures say about Zacharias.

Luke 1: 5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

It seems that they understood God's Priesthood, and who it was who forgave their sin as per the Prophets of old.

Is. 48: 16 Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me. 17 Thus saith the LORD, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; I am the LORD thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go. 18 O that thou hadst hearkened to my commandments! then had thy peace been as a river, and thy righteousness as the waves of the sea: Like Zacharias and Simeon and Anna.

So then, these folks would fit under Paul's teaching about who is Just before God. "(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified."

But would they fit under the definition Jesus gave of the Pharisees?

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

So it seems Zacharias "Yielded Himself" Servants to Obey God, as Paul teaches, and became a Servant of Righteousness.

As a Result of this belief, shown by obedience, which is defined as "Faith" in Scriptures, they received the Spirit of God, as God promises all men who Obey Him.

Luke 1: 67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying, (Of course, Pater said God Gives the Holy spirit to those who obey Him, Acts 5:32) 68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, 69 And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; (Not of the house of Levi) 70 As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began:

So here is a perfect example of a man who was given the Gospel of Christ and mixed the Gospel with Faith, AKA Obedience. (Doers, not hearers only)

Did Zacharias and Simeon partake of the Levitical Priesthood? There is no evidence that they didn't. But they knew who their "Redeemer" was, and that they were not "Justified" by sacrificial "works", but by Mercy promised to them who Love God and Keep His Commandments.

What about Simeon,

Luke 2:25 And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him. (Again, God gives His Holy Spirit to those who Obey Him, as Peter teaches) 26 And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord's Christ.

28 Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said, 29 Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word: 30 For mine eyes have seen thy salvation, 31 Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people; (As Paul said, "for God has shown them") 32 A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.

So by these scriptures, it is clear that Zacharias didn't promote the religion of the Pharisees and understood that God's Priesthood was foreshadowing their "Redeemer", which was Prophesied to come, "After those days". And as a result, they knew HIM when HE came.

Therefore;

Zacharias and Simeon were justified by Faith, (Being Doers of God's Laws, like Abraham, not hearers only, like the Pharisees) and not by the "works of the Law" being promoted by the Pharisees.

 

[GDL]

Since I am only a sibling in Christ

Only a sibling in Christ? You and I are siblings (synonym for brothers if that's better for you) of Jesus Christ per Romans 8: Is a sibling a bad thing? Put the train back on the rails.

Zacharias and Simeon were justified by Faith, (Being Doers of God's Laws, like Abraham, not hearers only, like the Pharisees)

So, their Faith is doing God's Law?

Again, how does Jesus Christ fit into this concept of Faith?

 

[Studyman]

Again, how does Jesus Christ fit into this concept of Faith?

Let's look at this from another perspective.

They sinned against God. The wages of sin is death. I'll use this analogy.

Lets say a man lusts after another mans goods, shoots this man, and takes his stuff, but get caught. This man is guilty, is judged and sentenced to life in Prison and then lethal injection. This man can stop stealing and killing for the rest of his life. He can help other prisoners and follow the Laws of the land perfectly. But all of his "works" will not get him out of his sentence. Only by a power greater than he, can he even hope for a pardon. And even in man's justice, if this man truly changes, and turns from his wickedness, and spends his remaining life promoting "works" which show his true repentance, he may indeed receive a pardon.

But if this same man continues to steal, beat other prisoners, continue in his disregard and disrespect for the Laws of the Land, this man will not be pardoned. There is not even a chance.

As it is written; "And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?

This is why the Paul of the Bible, whose words I posted but you have yet to even acknowledge, , teaches all men, Jew and Gentile, "that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance."

So what do the Scriptures say about Zacharias?

Luke 1: 5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

So we know Zacharias sinned, because all men have sinned. But because his sin was not held against him, as he was considered by the Spirit of Christ who inspired Luke, as both "Righteous, and Blameless", we know a higher power intervened.

So Zacharias was Justified, according to Luke, Yes? So he fits perfectly into Paul's definition of a man, Jew or Gentile, in the Body of Christ, in God's New Covenant, who is being justified. "(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

So who was that "Higher Power" that intervened, did Zacharias know?

Luke 1: 67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying, 68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, 69 And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; 70 As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began:


Is. 43: 24 Thou hast bought me no sweet cane with money, neither hast thou filled me with the fat of thy sacrifices: but thou hast made me to serve with thy sins, thou hast wearied me with thine iniquities. 25 I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins. 26 Put me in remembrance: let us plead together: declare thou, that thou mayest be justified.

So then, did Zacharias "receive the Spirit" by "works of the Law" the Pharisees, the children of the devil were promoting? Or by the hearing of faith, of their Savior, the Rock of Israel who they believed but did not see, blotted out their transgressions, as spoken by the Prophets since the world began?

And Simeon.

Luke 2: 30 For mine eyes have seen thy salvation, 31 Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people; 32 A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.

And Anna.

Luke 2: And she coming in that instant gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem.

I hope this all answers your question regarding how the Jesus of the Bible fits into Zacharias, Simeon and Anna's, and consequently my, Concept of Faith.

 

[GDL]

I hope this all answers your question regarding how the Jesus of the Bible fits into Zacharias, Simeon and Anna's, and consequently my, Concept of Faith.

You're missing context in the doers of the law section of Rom2:3-16 that speaks of a future judgment. It's bookended in Rom2:3 & Rom2:16 so we can see it clearly. In missing the context, again, you're misapplying the doers of the law verse and the justification stated there. Justification does not always speak of the initial & foundational justification we receive from faith in Jesus Christ:

• NET Acts13:38-39 Therefore let it be known to you, brothers, that through this one forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you, 39 and by this one everyone who believes is justified from everything from which the law of Moses could not justify you.
• NET Gal2:15-16 We are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners, 16 yet we know that no one is justified by the works of the law but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by the faithfulness of Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified.
• NET Gal3:11 Now it is clear no one is justified before God by the law, because the righteous one will live by faith.
• NET Gal2:21 I do not set aside God's grace, because if righteousness could come through the law, then Christ died for nothing!
• NET Gal3:21 Is the law therefore opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that was able to give life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law.
• NET Phil3:8-9 More than that, I now regard all things as liabilities compared to the far greater value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things– indeed, I regard them as dung!– that I may gain Christ, 9 and be found in him, not because I have my own righteousness derived from the law, but because I have the righteousness that comes by way of Christ's faithfulness– a righteousness from God that is in fact based on Christ's faithfulness.

There was a righteousness and blameless condition based upon living by the Law of Moses and the Levitical Priesthood including sacrificing goats (as you've referred to it). Paul said he also was of that blameless status as a Pharisee according to the righteousness in the law (Philippians3:5-6). No "higher power intervened" to mean they were "justified as doers of the law." But you likely will not be able to see this because you are not paying attention to the context of Scriptures. You misunderstand works of law as simply being sacrifices done by the corrupt Levitical Priesthood businessmen. If you pay close attention to the context of Gal3 you might see what works of law actually means. If you pay close attention to the context of Rom2 you might see how the justification of doers of law is applied in the day of God's wrath.

 

[Studyman]

You're missing context in the doers of the law section of Rom2:3-16 that speaks of a future judgment. It's bookended in Rom2:3 & Rom2:16 so we can see it clearly.

No, I'm not missing Paul's context. I simply don't adopt the religious philosophy you are promoting. I understand this religious philosophy you are promoting, having heard it from many preachers since my youth. I just don't believe it, given what the scriptures actually say.

In missing the context, again, you're misapplying the doers of the law verse and the justification stated there.

Again. Because of motive, you are not considering the scriptures I post, and therefore can't see that my belief doesn't come from this one verse. But from verses "All over the Scriptures" which teach the exact same thing as Paul. "(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

From Genesis; "If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

To Revelation; "Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus."

And everywhere in between. AS Paul teaches throughout his letters, "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived".

As Paul said about the mainstream preachers of his time. "For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

Justification does not always speak of the initial & foundational justification we receive from faith in Jesus Christ:

• NET Acts13:38-39 Therefore let it be known to you, brothers, that through this one forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you, 39 and by this one everyone who believes is justified from everything from which the law of Moses could not justify you.

Again, in the Law of Moses, how was a man that sinned, Justified? And in the Prophets, what power was represented in these sacrifices?

Is. 43: 24 Thou hast bought me no sweet cane with money, neither hast thou filled me with the fat of thy sacrifices: but thou hast made me to serve with thy sins, thou hast wearied me with thine iniquities. 25 I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins. 26 Put me in remembrance: let us plead together: declare thou, that thou mayest be justified.

So this verse in Acts you quoted actually makes Paul and My's point. That men were not justified by the "works of the law" given by Moses. As the Faith of Zacharias, Simeon and Anna show, who knew the sacrifices were temporary and pointed to their Savior, as they waited for the consolation of Israel, "in the Faithfulness of Jesus", which was from the heart and shown in their "Deeds".

Just as the Body of Christ waits for HIS Return by patient continuance in well doing while they seek for glory and honour and immortality.

2 Perter 3: 14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.

• NET Gal2:15-16 We are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners, 16 yet we know that no one is justified by the works of the law but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ.

But Jesus was obedient to God's Laws, Yes? That is the very reason God said HE gave Him a name above all others, Yes? And HE told men HE healed to "Go and Sin no more" just like the Prophets said in the scriptures, inspired by His Spirit, that I posted. How many goats did Jesus bring to the Levite Priests? How many men did HE take to the Levite Priest for Cleansing, according to the "Law".

Why did Jesus walk in all of God's Laws, but not the "works" of the Levitical Priesthood? I know, it's because according to the Scriptures these Priesthood duties required for cleansing and forgiveness, were only "ADDED" Till the seed should come.

• And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by the faithfulness of Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified.

Yes, that is what the Prophets, that Paul and Jesus taught from, that I am posting and you are ignoring, have been trying to show you.

Ez. 18: 30 Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; (Go and Sin no more) so iniquity shall not be your ruin. (Matt. 7:22) 31 Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel?

Listen to the Spirit of the Christ in Isaiah.

Is. 1:4 Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken the LORD, (Not Zacharias, Simeon and Anna though) they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward. 5 Why should ye be stricken any more? ye will revolt more and more: the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint.

This is the Pharisees. As their fathers did, so did they. All I'm doing GDL, is hearing and believing the Gospel of Christ. Listen to this Same Christ, whose Words are Spirit and Life, as HE teaches us, what HE taught Paul.

10 Hear the word of the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah.

11 "To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me"? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats.

I know you may not be able to see or accept this, and will probably not acknowledge or answer my question here, but I'll ask anyway.

Why were these men sacrificing bulls, goats and lambs in the first place? But were not hearing the Law of the Lord? Why, if the "LAW" said to sacrifice a goat for the forgiveness of sins, are these men who sacrificed goats, not cleansed? Is it not because "No flesh is justified by "works of the Law"?

16 Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil; 17 Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.

18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. 19 If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land: 20 But if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it.

And why is this GDL, why did God not accept Sacrifices for sin, from men like the Pharisees, but clearly accepted the sacrifices of Zacharias, Simeon and Anna? Is it not Because "(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.) and also "because by the "works of the law" no one will be justified."

Are the Pharisees not perfect examples of men who " refuse and rebel," against God and His instruction in righteousness. And Zacharias and Simeon perfect examples of sinners who repented and became "willing and obedient", like the Son of God?

Isn't this the same thing Paul teaches throughout the NT?

Rom. 6: 15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. (That means NO!) 16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? 17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. 18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.

 

[Studyman]

There was a righteousness and blameless condition based upon living by the Law of Moses and the Levitical Priesthood including sacrificing goats (as you've referred to it). Paul said he also was of that blameless status as a Pharisee according to the righteousness in the law (Philippians3:5-6).

This is where you have gone off the rails. You have somehow been convinced that Paul, before his conversion, along with the Pharisees, were "Living by the Law of Moses". This popular teaching of this world's religions, pushed onto me since my youth, is an insidious falsehood my friend, that has snared "many" who place their trust in the preachers of this world. It is the foundation of your teaching here and is the reason why I am trying so hard to reason with you in scriptures, out of Love of the brethren.

Neither Paul, before his conversion, nor the Pharisees, were "living by the Law of Moses". They were living in the Jews Religion, which had taken over the Temple, and had corrupted the Priesthood for centuries. They rejected the commandments of God by their own religious traditions. The Words of Jesus expose this insidious lie in EVERY WORD HE spoke to describe the Pharisees.

You mean well, but this is a darkness in your heart, that needs to be shown the Light. Paul was a perfect Pharisee, walking in the Jews Religion, that tithed mint and anise, but omitted the weightier matters of the Law of Moses. They persecuted the Church of God and murdered the very prophets God sent to them. He didn't "Live by the Law of Moses" by his own admission.

It is this foundation, which causes the contention between you and I. And I so hope you will consider the Christ's Words regarding the Pharisees religion, and who they really "Yielded themselves" servant to Obey, and who their father really was.

No "higher power intervened" to mean they were "justified as doers of the law."

Again, because of motive, and a preconceived judgement you have made about me, you won't acknowledge the scriptures I posted, which show who "Intervenes" and who "blotteth out the Transgressions" of those who believe in the Christ of the bible, and Repent, or "turn from their transgressions".

Why did God accept the sacrifices of Zacharias and Simeon, but not the Pharisees? God shows you, why do you not acknowledge Him?

Is. 1:4 Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken the LORD, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward.

But they still sacrifice animals, "according to the Law". Why did they reject God's Commandments, but still sacrificed animals?

10 Hear the word of the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah. 11 To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats.

16 Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil; 17 Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow. 18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

19 If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land:

Why? Because "to Obey is better than sacrifice", and "(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified."

But you likely will not be able to see this because you are not paying attention to the context of Scriptures. You misunderstand works of law as simply being sacrifices done by the corrupt Levitical Priesthood businessmen.

My understanding is that Paul was dealing with "corrupt Levitical Priesthood businessmen", who were "bewitching the Galatians". "corrupt Levitical Priesthood businessmen" that you are preaching to the world were "living by the Law of Moses and the Levitical Priesthood".

A proven falsehood. When you accept this undeniable Biblical truth, you will see differently.

If you pay close attention to the context of Gal3 you might see what works of law actually means. If you pay close attention to the context of Rom2 you might see how the justification of doers of law is applied in the day of God's wrath.

If the foundation of a man's religious philosophy is a falsehood, namely, that the Pharisees were ""living by the Law of Moses and the Levitical Priesthood", then how can this man know anything? Was Zacharias and Simeon not ""living by the Law of Moses and the Levitical Priesthood"? Not the Pharisees? You could correct yourself, simply by answering these questions.

We have come full circle to one of the first questions I asked you, that you also refused to answer.

How can you preach that the Pharisees, who like their fathers, rebelled against God's Commandments, despised His Judgments, polluted His Sabbaths, and persecuted the Church of God, had God's Oracles but didn't believe them, were falsely accusing Paul of doing evil and good may come, whose damnation was just, were suddenly, contrary to "EVERY" Teaching about them, promoting to the Galatians that they should "Live by the Law of Moses", as they were scheming how they might persecute the Church of God?

And yet, this is the very foundation of the religious philosophy you are promoting. I don't believe the Scriptures reflect this religious philosophy, for the reasons, and the scriptures I put forth.

My questions are relevant, and applicable.

 

[GDL]

@Studyman Thanks. No longer interested. I'm not reading your lengthy posts anymore because I've seen one too many times that they are filled with inserting your errors into the Text. Garbage in > garbage out is the old adage. Everything you disagree with is due to someone being involved in some theoretical universal, all-encompassing religious horror where all but you are wrong and only you can see it. But you are clearly making some foundational errors and proceeding from error to more error. I especially liked your theory about the intervening of the "higher power" in Zacharias's life that made his [imperfect] righteous lifestyle under Law under sin equate to perfect righteousness and foundational justification.

At this point, IMO you're the one who has created his own religion. But it may just be a repeat or version of an old one.

 

[Studyman]

@Studyman Thanks. No longer interested. I'm not reading your lengthy posts anymore because I've seen one too many times that they are filled with inserting your errors into the Text. Garbage in > garbage out is the old adage.

So then, it appears you are following your own old adage, and "taking you toys and going home".

Everything you disagree with is due to someone being involved in some theoretical universal, all-encompassing religious horror where all but you are wrong and only you can see it.

Goodness no. There are a lot of men who understand the Pharisees were not "living by the Law of Moses". We disagree because you have chosen to adopt a religious philosophy which denies this and other Biblical Truths. Just because you refuse to see them, or even acknowledge them, doesn't mean everyone does, IMO.

But you are clearly making some foundational errors and proceeding from error to more error. I especially liked your theory about the intervening of the "higher power" in Zacharias's life that made his [imperfect] righteous lifestyle under Law under sin equate to perfect righteousness and foundational justification.

Yes, it appears there are many Scriptures which don't align with your adopted religious philosophy. I find it sadly all to common, but common just the same, that modern preachers claim to believe Paul, until his words contradict their adopted religious theories. Your comments above regarding Zacharias is a perfect example of this unfortunate phenomenon.

Paul teaches the Body of Christ, both Jew and Gentile, under the New Priesthood;

Rom. 6: 16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? 17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. 18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.

And yet Zacharias, a living example of a man who followed Paul's teaching and was praised by God in His Inspired Word for generations, who God gave His Holy Spirit to, is demeaned by you, as underserving of God's Praise, or of the Christ's intervention in forgiving him.

And if you are willing to demean or attempt to erase the righteousness of a man God knew and spoke to, how much greater disdain will you have for a nobody who believes the same Paul today?

My hope is that when no one is looking, when you aren't on a public forum in which the fleshes desire to save face is so strong, that you might read the scriptures I posted, and consider that maybe Paul, the Prophets, and the Jesus of the Bible may be right. And the "many" who come in His Name, who profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate., may not.

At this point, IMO you're the one who has created his own religion. But it may just be a repeat or version of an old one.

No, I didn't create the Way of the Lord. Nor am I perfect. Nevertheless, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus., and believe all that is written, as did Paul, Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.

Thank you so much for the discussion.

 

[GDL]

So then, it appears you are following your own old adage, and "taking you toys and going home".

Maybe. But your toys are of no interest to me. Why play with twigs and a ball of yarn when I have access to a hardwood bat and a hardball?

Goodness no. There are a lot of men who understand the Pharisees were not "living by the Law of Moses". We disagree because you have chosen to adopt a religious philosophy which denies this and other Biblical Truths. Just because you refuse to see them, or even acknowledge them, doesn't mean everyone does, IMO.

A religious philosophy - your answer to everything as I said. No context from Scripture > no substance.

Yes, it appears there are many Scriptures which don't align with your adopted religious philosophy. I find it sadly all to common, but common just the same, that modern preachers claim to believe Paul, until his words contradict their adopted religious theories. Your comments above regarding Zacharias is a perfect example of this unfortunate phenomenon.

Appearance through eyes that don't see, IMO.

Paul teaches the Body of Christ, both Jew and Gentile, under the New Priesthood;

Rom. 6: 16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? 17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. 18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.

And yet Zacharias, a living example of a man who followed Paul's teaching and was praised by God in His Inspired Word for generations, who God gave His Holy Spirit to, is demeaned by you, as underserving of God's Praise, or of the Christ's intervention in forgiving him.

And if you are willing to demean or attempt to erase the righteousness of a man God knew and spoke to, how much greater disdain will you have for a nobody who believes the same Paul today?

My hope is that when no one is looking, when you aren't on a public forum in which the fleshes desire to save face is so strong, that you might read the scriptures I posted, and consider that maybe Paul, the Prophets, and the Jesus of the Bible may be right. And the "many" who come in His Name, who profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate., may not.

Actually, I'm a fairly open book on these forums. If there's something I don't want to discuss I'll typically say so (while like most preferring to remain an anonymous keyboard warrior on this media!). My views of Scripture are also fairly detailed and in context for anyone who is able to scrutinize. I've invited you to analyze Scriptural terminology in context and am convinced that you are not able to do so. It's easy to string Scriptures together when you make up terminology and connections that don't exist. There's subsequently presumed safety in avoiding detailed analysis of Scripture in context. Your practice is not that difficult to see.

If you come to understand that no man apart from the Christ was ever able to be foundationally justified by doing law even by faith, maybe you'll then come to understand why Zacharias needed Christ like all men do. There is no foundational righteousness or justification apart from Christ no matter how well one was keeping law. Zacharias knew he needed to be saved by faith in the coming Redeemer because he knew he couldn't be redeemed and saved by keeping law - he knew that no man could. He needed a release from imprisonment from sin and death that he could not accomplish no matter how well he lived according to law. His righteous and blameless status under the Old Covenant was not sufficient to accomplish what he and we all needed.

This is not all about a corrupt priesthood. And the law could not foundationally justify a man. When you understand what works of law means - that it is not speaking specifically about the sacrificial works of a corrupted priesthood - but about what the law/commandments were actually doing under the OC and why it was added for transgressions, maybe then you'll begin to come to see what your errors from a practice that avoids Scripture in context have made up.

You might want to pick up context for Rom6:16-18 by reading at minimum the first 15 verses of the chapter. "Context" is an important word for students of a Text.

No, I didn't create the Way of the Lord. Nor am I perfect. Nevertheless, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus., and believe all that is written, as did Paul, Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.

Thank you so much for the discussion.

Oddly, it seems your misunderstanding of law and foundations looks like it may have eventuated in what might be a healthy respect for obedience to God. As long as you understand and have faith in Christ - who and what He is and what He did for us (including for Zach.) that we could not do for ourselves - and since you know that faith in God and obedience to God are virtually synonymous - then you may actually be on the path of the Scripture you reference. I'm concerned more about those who think Christ terminated the law. I'm also growing more concerned for some who misplace the importance and ability of Law apart from Grace.

 

[Studyman]

If you come to understand that no man apart from the Christ was ever able to be foundationally justified by doing law even by faith, maybe you'll then come to understand why Zacharias needed Christ like all men do.

I'm quite sure you cannot find anywhere in my posts where I ever suggest, or even imply that righteousness comes apart from Christ?

There is no foundational righteousness or justification apart from Christ no matter how well one was keeping law.

Again, you are making assumptions about my understanding that cannot be supported by my actual words.

Zacharias knew he needed to be saved by faith in the coming Redeemer because he knew he couldn't be redeemed and saved by keeping law - he knew that no man could.

Neither I, nor the Scriptures I posted, are saying that Zacharias was "Saved" by keeping the Law. My posts and analogies make this very clear. I'm not sure why you would imply such things about me.

He needed a release from imprisonment from sin and death that he could not accomplish no matter how well he lived according to law. His righteous and blameless status under the Old Covenant was not sufficient to accomplish what he and we all needed.

IMO, your definition of the Old Covenant doesn't seem to align with the Words of the God who defined it. But in the analogy that I gave you, in response to the question you asked me, I said nothing Zacharias could do could remove his sins, his Pardon can only come from a High Power than he. And that Power, as I also told you, was Christ, the Christ of the Bible IMO. Not sure where these implications are coming from, but I know it isn't from my actual posts.

This is not all about a corrupt priesthood. And the law could not foundationally justify a man
When you understand what works of law means - that it is not speaking specifically about the sacrificial works of a corrupted priesthood - but about what the law/commandments were actually doing under the OC and why it was added for transgressions, maybe then you'll begin to come to see what your errors from a practice that avoids Scripture in context have made up.

Only by believing the falsehood that the Pharisees were "living by the Law and Moses" can a man justify this religious philosophy you are promoting. And rejecting the Truth about Zacharias, who lived in the same town, was surrounded by the same religion, and didn't rebel against his God as the Pharisees were but was already following Paul's instruction to the Body of Christ in his time, to "Yield themselves" servants to Obey God, before the Christ was even born.

I don't think you can identify even ONE scripture that I have avoided speaking about. While it seems that you have not addressed several. Not sure why, if we are seeking truth of the Scriptures, that we can't discuss them all.

You might want to pick up context for Rom6:16-18 by reading at minimum the first 15 verses of the chapter. "Context" is an important word for students of a Text.

Rom. 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? 2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

Yes, context is important. I know for some reason you don't like answering my questions. But it is how I discuss Scriptures in search of Biblical Truth. So I'll ask you anyway, since my motive is seeking the Truth of God. Wasn't Zacharias' Sins forgiven by the Same Christ who forgave Paul's sin, and by the Same Grace of God? Didn't Zacharias know of the Mercy and Grace responsible for his pardon? Isn't that the message of his son, John the Baptist?

"To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins, Through the tender mercy of our God; whereby the dayspring from on high hath visited us,"

So, in the Church of God that both Paul and Zacharias partook of, Shall they continue in sin, that grace/mercy may abound? 2 God forbid. How shall they, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

Did the Same Christ, not teach the same "good news" in the Gospel of Christ where these Word's of the same Christ are found?

Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel?

Where is Paul teaching a different Gospel of Christ, than the Christ Himself taught in the Law and Prophets?

And how can a man "Not continue in Sin", unless he repents and "Yields himself" a servant to obey God, as both Paul and Zacharias and Simeon, and Caleb, and Joshua, and Daniel, and Meshak, and all the examples of faith in the entire Bible did?

I think these are relevant questions given the Jesus of the Bible did say to "Go and Sin no more".

Oddly, it seems your misunderstanding of law and foundations looks like it may have eventuated in what might be a healthy respect for obedience to God. As long as you understand Christ - who and what He is and what He did for us (including for Zach.) that we could not do for ourselves - and since you know that faith in God and obedience to God are virtually synonymous - then you may actually be on the path of the Scripture you reference. I'm concerned more about those who think Christ terminated the law. I'm also growing more concerned for some who misplace the importance and ability of Law apart from Grace.

I think what was missing in the Jews religion, is the same thing that is missing in many modern religions "who come in Christ's Name". And that is the purpose of Grace to begin with. Whether it was the Grace of God given men though the Sacrifices of the Levitical Priesthood offered to God by Priests on men's behalf, or the Grace of God given men through the Sacrifice of the Priest of God, the Christ Himself, offered to God on men's behalf, the reason wasn't for men to continue to reject God's "instruction in righteousness" or to "continue in sin".

And yet here you and I are, placed by God in a world in which the mainstream religions who professes to know God, rebels against His Commandments, despises His Judgments, have created their own Sabbaths and High days while rejecting the Feasts of the Lord. They have created huge religious businesses and have amassed untold wealth off of God's own Word, who became Flesh and dwelled among us.

And they claim justification for these Deeds, by the Sacrificial "Works" of the Priesthood "After the order of Melchizedek", in the same way the Pharisees, who did the same things, believed they were justified by the sacrificial "works" of the Priesthood, "After the Order of Aaron".

How is either religion, exhibiting the Faith of Jesus?

 

[GDL]

Wasn't Zacharias' Sins forgiven by the Same Christ who forgave Paul's sin, and by the Same Grace of God? Didn't Zacharias know of the Mercy and Grace responsible for his pardon?

Didn't you use Rom2:13 to speak of how Zacharias was foundationally justified and then tell me that the wrath judgment context of this verse was another concept the religions get wrong?

Don't you believe that Zacharias being righteous and blameless before Christ arrives means some higher power made his righteous & blameless status mean he was foundationally justified as a doer of law?

Don't you explain Gal2:16 works of law as being the corrupted priesthood sacrifices?

How about describing in your own words the pre-Christ status of Zacharias & how he obtained foundational justification apart from your mysterious higher power claim?

 

[Clare73]

"Not under the law" meaning not under the judgment of the law, not under curse of the law, but not free from the law, which law has been summed up in one rule: love of God and neighbor as self, and which law is written on the hearts of the born again of the Holy Spirit.

Loving and law keeping are spiritually/salvificly worthless if one is not born again.

 

[GDL]

I think what was missing in the Jews religion, is the same thing that is missing in many modern religions "who come in Christ's Name". And that is the purpose of Grace to begin with. Whether it was the Grace of God given men though the Sacrifices of the Levitical Priesthood offered to God by Priests on men's behalf, or the Grace of God given men through the Sacrifice of the Priest of God, the Christ Himself, offered to God on men's behalf, the reason wasn't for men to continue to reject God's "instruction in righteousness" or to "continue in sin".

And yet here you and I are, placed by God in a world in which the mainstream religions who professes to know God, rebels against His Commandments, despises His Judgments, have created their own Sabbaths and High days while rejecting the Feasts of the Lord. They have created huge religious businesses and have amassed untold wealth off of God's own Word, who became Flesh and dwelled among us.

I think you think many of us do not understand grace including this aspect of it: Titus2:11-14

Some "religions" that have become more and more "mainstream" argue for God's Law as and even more passionately than you do. They are well represented on this forum. I find that they have a better handle on some Biblical terminology than you do or are at least not making the errors you are - IMO of course.

Agreed that the world has turned The Faith of Jesus Christ into big business. That's what the world does. We know what happened in the corrupted temple. Peter warns about something similar for we the Temple (2Pet2:1-3) - Use the KJV or the YLT version and you'll see in 2:3 what I mean.

 

[GDL]

I see "not under law" as involving the curse of the law as you say, but I also see it as having a wider application of no longer being under the old era of Moses where God had young Israel enclosed, cared for by a guardian, and was using His Law to tutor them experientially about sin by exposing it. There may be an even wider scope than this.

I also see "works of law" mainly fitting into this concept.

 

[Clare73]

I see "not under law" as involving the curse of the law as you say, but I also see it as having a wider application of no longer being under the old era of Moses where God had young Israel enclosed, cared for by a guardian, and was using His Law to tutor them experientially about sin by exposing it.

That is what the New Covenant and grace is about, right. . .all those being inextricably joined in guardianship. . .in contrast to freedom in Christ?

There may be an even wider scope than this.

I also see "works of law" mainly fitting into this concept.

I see works of law as obeying the Pentateuch as the means of salvation, which again, it and all that it entails is not the New Covenant program.

 

[Studyman]

Didn't you use Rom2:13 to speak of how Zacharias was foundationally justified and then tell me that the wrath judgment context of this verse was another concept the religions get wrong?

I used Paul’s Words which confirm the Christ of the Bible’s Words, that if Zacharias was willing and obedient, he would eat of the land God was bringing him into.

Zacharias believed God, whose Faith was shown by his works, and it was accounted to him as righteousness.

I have no reason to doubt His Words, or Luke’s, or the words of Paul.

Don't you believe that Zacharias being righteous and blameless before Christ arrives means some higher power made his righteous & blameless status mean he was foundationally justified as a doer of law?

The Christ arrived from heaven in the beginning with God. You seem to forgetting you own arguments.

Abraham was also justified before the man Jesus was born, and it seems, for the same reasons.

I’m am taken aback that you don’t know these things.

Don't you explain Gal2:16 works of law as being the corrupted priesthood sacrifices?

I showed you Gods own Words when He asked a religion who rebelled against His Laws, Despised His Judgement and polluted Hos Sabbaths, “to what purpose do you sacrifice and offer burnt offerings to me”, given they had departed out of the “Way of the Lord”?

Paul is telling us why in Romans and Galatians, “To justify themselves”, not by being willing and obedient as the Lords Christ instructed but as it were, by “works of the Law” of justification, added ”til the Seed should come”.

How about describing in your own words the pre-Christ status of Zacharias & how he obtained foundational justification apart from your mysterious higher power claim?

Jesus Himself said men would not be persuaded, even if ONE rose from the dead. Once again, His Words are spot on.

To me, Zacharias was justified by the Same Power Abraham was justified by.

Of course, since it seems you are here for the express purpose of justifying yourself, there will likely be no real discussion of Scriptures, and you will just move along to another series of gotcha questions, and another, and another. I have been here many times. I was just hoping it would be different with you.

 

[GDL]

That is what the New Covenant and grace is about, right. . .all those being inextricably joined in guardianship. . .in contrast to freedom in Christ?

In essence I think so. And Titus2:11-14 explaining that grace (in Christ) also teaches us to not abuse that freedom by being ungodly & unrighteous as we await the return of our Lord. So, we go back to discussing the law's role in Christ in Spirit

I see works of law as obeying the Pentateuch as the means of salvation, which again, it and all that it entails is not the New Covenant program.

Pretty close to what I see.

You mentioned the curse of the law. Gal3:10 may be the closest "works of law" comes to being explained in one verse - works of law being explained as to emmeno (persevere, remain - same root word that's so important in the NC - abide, endure) in/by all the things that have been written in the Book of the Law. The last clause "to do them" I see based upon the grammar as being parallel to the first clause (persevering in all the things written in the law is basically saying the same thing as doing all the things written in the law) or clarification of the first clause which is not much different.

Gal3 will go on to tighten this up a bit more by taking us back into the OC.

If we track "works of law" in Romans, the explanatory ("for") clause at the end of Rom3:20 not only sets up part of the discussion of "works of law" in Rom3 but is also Paul setting up for the explanations of law & sin in Rom7.