The Letter Kills ~ Instantly

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
And so the Law of God continues to condemn all to death -- the second death as Paul points out in Rom 3:19-20 and Rom 6:23.
No life apart from the Gospel.
1 Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God"

Includes that unit of Law (the TEN) where as Paul said "the first commandment with a promise" is the 5th commandment Eph 6:1-2

And so it is still a "sin" to take God's name in vain Ex 20:7 just like it always was.

God's command is to believe in the One he has sent.
What matters is faith and trust in the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Jesus' New Covenant commands are two: to love God and to love our neighbor.
That's what matters in the New Covenant.

The New Covenant text is the same in the NT as in the OT.

Here it is in the OT Jer 31:31-34
And here it is verbatim the same - in the NT Heb 8:6-12 -- unchanged.

Jesus said "if you would enter into eternal life - KEEP the Commandments" Matt 19 and is asked "Which ones?".

Jesus did not list "Love God" but He did list Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbor as yourself" as well as a bunch of other commandments from "the TEN". Paul lists them again in Rom 13 just as Christ did in Matt 19.

Neither of them mention "do not take God's name in vain" but we know that still matters as well.

So in Matt 22 Jesus quotes
Deut 6:5 - "Love God"
Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbor"

And says that all of scripture is firmly established on these two OT commands of God.
 
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
24,945
6,054
North Carolina
✟273,781.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Clare73 said:
God's command is to believe in the One he has sent.
What matters is faith and trust in the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Jesus' New Covenant commands are two: to love God and to love our neighbor.
That's what matters in the New Covenant.
The New Covenant text is the same in the NT as in the OT.

Here it is in the OT Jer 31:31-34
And here it is verbatim the same - in the NT Heb 8:6-12 -- unchanged.
And?

Jesus said the whole Decalogue is observed by observance of his two commandments.

So what's the problem here?
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
And?

Jesus said the whole Decalogue is observed by observance of his two commandments.

So what's the problem here?

No he said that all of scripture is firmly established on these two OT commandments. "The Law AND the prophets" -- all of scripture - solidly based on these two commandments in the Law of Moses.

Matt 22
36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” 37 And He said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 Upon these two commandments hang the whole Law and the Prophets.”

"40 On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.”

"40 The entire law and all the demands of the prophets are based on these two commandments.” NLT

"40 All the law and the ·writings of the prophets [L prophets] ·depend [are based; L hang] on these two commands.” EXB
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
24,945
6,054
North Carolina
✟273,781.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
No he said that all of scripture is firmly established on these two OT commandments. "The Law AND the prophets" -- all of scripture - solidly based on these two commandments in the Law of Moses.
See Paul for what that means (Romans 13:8-10).
 
Upvote 0

Nathan@work

Always ready :)
Feb 19, 2021
1,025
360
44
Garfield
✟19,517.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I agree with most of what you say, however, I'm trying to understand why you said this:

I take it that you're referring to Rom. 3:27 "Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith."

The way I read this is that Paul is using a literary device called "a play on words." He is using the term "law" which usually is a reference to the Pentateuch, but using it to explain a principle of operation, as is the definition of "law" in the phrase "laws of physics." So when he says "law of works," he means principle of works, and "law of faith" means principle of faith. It is the same as when he says he has a "law of sin" working in his members, he means there is a principle of sin in operation.

So in reference to how we relate to God, if a person is relying his own acts of obedience to be acceptable in God's sight, then that person is said to be "under law." The "law of works" would be a way of thinking, or worldview, about how to relate to God. Someone working the "law of works" to become accepted is someone relying on his obedience to the written code for his salvation.

But if a person doesn't rely on his acts of obedience to the law, but rather relies only on Christ for his acceptance, he is said to be "under grace." So his worldview, or way of thinking about relating to God, is radically different than the person who is "under law." Someone working the "law of faith" to be accepted by God is someone relying on the works of Christ (His death and resurrection) to be made acceptable in God's sight.

Perhaps you mean the same thing, I don't know. If so, please forgive my misunderstanding. It just looked to me like you were fixing the definition of "law" to be the written code in this context.

No, I was not referencing any passage, you got it nailed.

I was not referencing specifically the written law, otherwise referred to as the Mosaic law, but laws of God in whole.

That is the thing some bypass when looking to the "law" for guidance. God's 'law' transcends more than what is just written down. Jesus touched on it when He would say "You have heard.....but I tell you....".

This is what Faith does. It looks to the Creator of all(laws included) for guidance and acceptance, rather than what can be seen, touched, heard with the flesh.

The law of Faith is what you explained, but the details of it go deeper. It is a reliance on the work of Christ because we know He keeps all the laws of God perfectly. So we, as believers, look at the law with Faith and that is how we 'keep' it.

Of course, this all goes way beyond the reason for this thread so I'll stop there. :)
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
No he said that all of scripture is firmly established on these two OT commandments. "The Law AND the prophets" -- all of scripture - solidly based on these two commandments in the Law of Moses.

Matt 22
36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” 37 And He said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 Upon these two commandments hang the whole Law and the Prophets.”

"40 On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.”

"40 The entire law and all the demands of the prophets are based on these two commandments.” NLT

"40 All the law and the ·writings of the prophets [L prophets] ·depend [are based; L hang] on these two commands.” EXB




See Paul for what that means (Romans 13:8-10).

Christ's Words: "firmly established on" these two OT commandments does not = "fully deleted by these two OT commandments".

which is why it is still a sin to take God's name in vain and it is why Paul reminds us in Eph 6:1-2

Paul's words: "honor your father and mother" is still the "first commandment WITH a promise" in that still-valid distinct unit of TEN.

1. Example - illustrating why we need scripture and not just two verses.

Some Christians believe it is ok to make graven images and bow down before them and to promise to in some way "serve" those that they represent. Others think that the "details" in Ex 20 prohibit it.

There are no "details" in Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18 addressing the very "details" in that discussion/debate - so we need the scripture that we find in Ex 20 to provide those details. We need "scripture" that Jesus calls in Matt 22 "The Law AND the prophets".
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,416
4,600
Hudson
✟281,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
So here is what I know. There is a contrast provided in the 'laws' spoken of, but the contrast is not of two different laws - but the same law viewed from different angles.

The law of works is the way Jews would see the law.

The law of Faith is the way believers would see the law.

Jews saw the law, much like you and some others, as requirements to do - or at least try to do - in order to show righteousness. Some thought they actually earned righteousness, others just used it as proof of righteousness in them.

Believers look at the law and see the righteousness of God. We see that the law demands perfection and that we have not, could not, and will not ever be that perfect. What it does is then turn our focus onto Christ and His perfection that was done for us.

No. There are both Jewish believers and Jewish non-believers who to follow all of the works of the law, some of them, or none of them. Again, Peter was a believer, but he followed the law in Acts 10:28 that forbade Jews to visit or associate with Gentiles and he declined to eat clean animals that were common in Acts 10:11-15. In 2 Thessalonians 2:15, 2 Thessalonians 3:6, and 1 Corinthians 11:2, Paul instructed them to follow the traditions that they were taught. Likewise, Acts 1:12 refers to a Sabbath's day journey. There are 24 chapters worth of traditions in the Mishnah for just how to keep the Sabbath which range from how far from the city someone can walk or to how much someone can without counting as work, so to some extent works of the law were how some Jews saw how the Mosaic Law should be obeyed, however, there is nothing about someone following the tradition of a Sabbath's day journey that implies that they view it as something that is required in order to earn their justification, though there were some Jews who did hold that view.

Furthermore, the oral law contains traditions that are not in regard to how to obey the Mosaic Law, such as the tradition mentioned in Mark 7:3-4, it refers to a tradition of washing cups and posts and washing their hands before they eat. It also contained fences that increase the requirement of the law in order to prevent anyone from accidentally breaking the law. Lastly, it contained rulings, such as in Leviticus 19:23-25, it says that when they planted a tree in the land that they couldn't eat of it for the first three years, the fourth year was holy to God, and the fifth year they could eat it, but what happened if someone planted a tree on a hill that had fruit that rolled down and mixed with the fruit of trees that were planted during a previous year? When a nation wanted to implement the Mosaic Laws, then there were many questions that naturally arose about how to follow it where someone had to make a ruling about what to do in particular situations, which got passed down orally as case law, which again has nothing to do with having a particular view of righteousness.

Christ was righteous, so if someone were following him around and recording everything he did in order to determine how to live righteously, then they could write down certain patterns of behavior, and what they would end up with would look a lot like the Mosaic Law. He was already righteous, so living in accordance with the Mosaic Law was not about trying to become righteous or about trying to prove to others that he was righteous, but rather the law simply describes the way that a righteous person lives, which also describes the way that we live when God had declared us to be righteous. Whenever we do what is righteous in obedience to the law accordance with Christ's example, we are showing his righteousness.

The Mosaic Law came with instructions for what to do when the people sinned, so saying that it required perfect obedience is pure deception. The fact that we can repent after we have sinned demonstrates that perfect obedience is not a requirement. Even if someone managed to have perfect obedience, then there still would be nothing that they earned because our justification has never been something that could be earned as a wage (Romans 4:4-5). God said that His law is not too difficult for us to obey and I believe Him (Deuteronomy 30:11-14). Christ gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so the way to focus on what Christ has done for us is by becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Mosaic Law (Acts 21:20)

It takes Faith to trust that Christ fulfilled the law because we could not.

In Galatians 5:14, anyone who has ever loved their neighbor has fulfilled the entire law, so refusing to believe that we can fulfill it is refusing to have faith in Christ.

In regards to Peter, what we know is that he lived as a Gentile - and then was rebuked by Paul for turning his back on that in favor of pretending to live like a Jew when around the Jews.

Peter did not just associate with them - he lived like them.

[Gal 2:11-14 ESV]

But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.

For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy.

But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, "If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?"


Peter stood condemned because he had turned from Faith to the law in hypocrisy. What he was doing was deceitful and it led other believers astray.

Anyways, this starts to turn the topic of the thread off course so I will stop here.

Living like a Gentile refers to not following Jewish traditions, but does not refer to living in disobedience to God.
 
Upvote 0

Nathan@work

Always ready :)
Feb 19, 2021
1,025
360
44
Garfield
✟19,517.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
No. There are both Jewish believers and Jewish non-believers who to follow all of the works of the law, some of them, or none of them. Again, Peter was a believer, but he followed the law in Acts 10:28 that forbade Jews to visit or associate with Gentiles and he declined to eat clean animals that were common in Acts 10:11-15. In 2 Thessalonians 2:15, 2 Thessalonians 3:6, and 1 Corinthians 11:2, Paul instructed them to follow the traditions that they were taught. Likewise, Acts 1:12 refers to a Sabbath's day journey. There are 24 chapters worth of traditions in the Mishnah for just how to keep the Sabbath which range from how far from the city someone can walk or to how much someone can without counting as work, so to some extent works of the law were how some Jews saw how the Mosaic Law should be obeyed, however, there is nothing about someone following the tradition of a Sabbath's day journey that implies that they view it as something that is required in order to earn their justification, though there were some Jews who did hold that view.

Furthermore, the oral law contains traditions that are not in regard to how to obey the Mosaic Law, such as the tradition mentioned in Mark 7:3-4, it refers to a tradition of washing cups and posts and washing their hands before they eat. It also contained fences that increase the requirement of the law in order to prevent anyone from accidentally breaking the law. Lastly, it contained rulings, such as in Leviticus 19:23-25, it says that when they planted a tree in the land that they couldn't eat of it for the first three years, the fourth year was holy to God, and the fifth year they could eat it, but what happened if someone planted a tree on a hill that had fruit that rolled down and mixed with the fruit of trees that were planted during a previous year? When a nation wanted to implement the Mosaic Laws, then there were many questions that naturally arose about how to follow it where someone had to make a ruling about what to do in particular situations, which got passed down orally as case law, which again has nothing to do with having a particular view of righteousness.

Christ was righteous, so if someone were following him around and recording everything he did in order to determine how to live righteously, then they could write down certain patterns of behavior, and what they would end up with would look a lot like the Mosaic Law. He was already righteous, so living in accordance with the Mosaic Law was not about trying to become righteous or about trying to prove to others that he was righteous, but rather the law simply describes the way that a righteous person lives, which also describes the way that we live when God had declared us to be righteous. Whenever we do what is righteous in obedience to the law accordance with Christ's example, we are showing his righteousness.

The Mosaic Law came with instructions for what to do when the people sinned, so saying that it required perfect obedience is pure deception. The fact that we can repent after we have sinned demonstrates that perfect obedience is not a requirement. Even if someone managed to have perfect obedience, then there still would be nothing that they earned because our justification has never been something that could be earned as a wage (Romans 4:4-5). God said that His law is not too difficult for us to obey and I believe Him (Deuteronomy 30:11-14). Christ gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so the way to focus on what Christ has done for us is by becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Mosaic Law (Acts 21:20)



In Galatians 5:14, anyone who has ever loved their neighbor has fulfilled the entire law, so refusing to believe that we can fulfill it is refusing to have faith in Christ.



Living like a Gentile refers to not following Jewish traditions, but does not refer to living in disobedience to God.

Curiosity question here. Your profile thing says your Messianic.

So you are a Jew correct? Do you know what tribe your from?
 
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,416
4,600
Hudson
✟281,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Curiosity question here. Your profile thing says your Messianic.

So you are a Jew correct? Do you know what tribe your from?

My mom was born Jewish, which makes me Jewish, however, she became a Christian in her 20's, so I was raised Baptist, so being Jewish has nothing to do with my theology. Being Messianic is inclusive of both Jews and Gentiles. I do not know which tribe that I am from.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Nathan@work
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
24,945
6,054
North Carolina
✟273,781.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
No. There are both Jewish believers and Jewish non-believers who to follow all of the works of the law, some of them, or none of them. Again, Peter was a believer,
Which law God abrogated in a vision to Peter.
but he followed the law in Acts 10:28 that forbade Jews to visit or associate with Gentiles
REALLY? !!!

Acts 10:28 - "He said to them: 'You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with a Gentile or visit him. But God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean.' "
and he declined to eat clean animals that were common in Acts 10:11-15.
Are you serious? Your abuse of the NT Scriptures is egregious.

In Acts 10:11-16, God abrogated that law in a vision, which abrogation by God Peter resists.
In 2 Thessalonians 2:15, 2 Thessalonians 3:6, and 1 Corinthians 11:2, Paul instructed them to follow the traditions that they were taught.
The traditions (Christian teaching) given to them in his letters and preaching! (2 Thessalonians 2:15)

Are you not aware there is accountability for misrepresenting the Word of God? (1 Corinthians 3:13-15), for just plucking words and phrases from the texts, with no consideration for their meaning in context?
The NT is a closed book to you.
Likewise, Acts 1:12 refers to a Sabbath's day journey.
A Sabbath day's journey was a measurement, limited to about 3/4 mile. It is not referring to a Sabbath Day observance.
There are 24 chapters worth of traditions in the Mishnah for just how to keep the Sabbath which range from how far from the city someone can walk or to how much someone can without counting as work, so to some extent works of the law were how some Jews saw how the Mosaic Law should be obeyed, however, there is nothing about someone following the tradition of a Sabbath's day journey that implies that they view it as something that is required in order to earn their justification, though there were some Jews who did hold that view.

Furthermore, the oral law contains traditions that are not in regard to how to obey the Mosaic Law, such as the tradition mentioned in Mark 7:3-4, it refers to a tradition of washing cups and posts and washing their hands before they eat. It also contained fences that increase the requirement of the law in order to prevent anyone from accidentally breaking the law. Lastly, it contained rulings, such as in Leviticus 19:23-25, it says that when they planted a tree in the land that they couldn't eat of it for the first three years, the fourth year was holy to God, and the fifth year they could eat it, but what happened if someone planted a tree on a hill that had fruit that rolled down and mixed with the fruit of trees that were planted during a previous year? When a nation wanted to implement the Mosaic Laws, then there were many questions that naturally arose about how to follow it where someone had to make a ruling about what to do in particular situations, which got passed down orally as case law, which again has nothing to do with having a particular view of righteousness.

Christ was righteous, so if someone were following him around and recording everything he did in order to determine how to live righteously, then they could write down certain patterns of behavior, and what they would end up with would look a lot like the Mosaic Law. He was already righteous, so living in accordance with the Mosaic Law was not about trying to become righteous or about trying to prove to others that he was righteous, but rather the law simply describes the way that a righteous person lives, which also describes the way that we live when God had declared us to be righteous. Whenever we do what is righteous in obedience to the law accordance with Christ's example, we are showing his righteousness.
The Mosaic Law came with instructions for what to do when the people sinned, so saying that it required perfect obedience is pure deception. The fact that we can repent after we have sinned demonstrates that perfect obedience is not a requirement.
So Paul is a deceiver, you say, when he states that "all who rely on the law are under a curse" (Galatians 3:10).
Even if someone managed to have perfect obedience, then there still would be nothing that they earned because our justification has never been something that could be earned as a wage (Romans 4:4-5). God said that His law is not too difficult for us to obey and I believe Him (Deuteronomy 30:11-14).
So Paul, who received his teaching from Jesus Christ personally, in the third heaven, got it wrong. . .and you got it right?
What's wrong with this picture?
Christ gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so the way to focus on what Christ has done for us is by becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Mosaic Law (Acts 21:20)
Shoe-horning again. . we are told no such thing.

Acts 21:20-26 is one of the examples of Paul becoming "all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some" (1 Corinthians 9:22), where "to the Jews I became like a Jew. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. . ." (1 Corinthians 9:20-21).

Again to remind you: there is accountability for misrepresenting the Word of God.
(1 Corinthians 3:13-15)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,416
4,600
Hudson
✟281,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Which law God abrogated in a vision to Peter.
REALLY? !!!

Peter could have obeyed God's commands in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 and God's command in his vision by simply killing and eating one of the clean animals, but his refusal to do that was the point God was making to him in his vision. Peter did not just object by saying that he had never eaten anything that was unclean, but also added that he had never eaten anything that was common. Furthermore, if God had been abrogating His own laws, then he would have rebuked Peter for calling unclean what he had made clean, but God did not do that, rather He only rebuked Peter for calling common what He had made clean. So Peter had correctly identified the unclean animals as unclean and had correctly refrained from eating them, but he had incorrectly identified the clean animals as common and had incorrectly declined to eat them. Peter interpreted his vision three times as being in regard to incorrectly identifying Gentiles without saying a word about any of God's laws being abrogated, so his vision had nothing to do with that. In Deuteronomy 13:4-5, the way that God instructed His people to determine that someone was a false prophet or dreamer who was not speaking for Him was if they taught against obeying His law, so God simply did not leave Himself any room to abrogate any of His laws through means of a vision and that was not what He was doing.

Acts 10:28
- "He said to them: 'You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with a Gentile or visit him. But God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean.' "
Are you serious? Your abuse of the NT Scriptures is egregious.

Acts 10:28 - "He said to them: 'You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with a Gentile or visit him. But God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean.' "

I don't see how you can deny that this verse refers to a law that forbids Jews to associate or visit with a Gentile. This is not a law that is found anywhere in the Mosaic Law and is therefore a man-made law. In Galatians 2:11-16 Peter stopped associating or visiting with the Gentiles, so he was straightforwardly following this law.

The traditions (Christian teaching) given to them in his letters and preaching! (2 Thessalonians 2:15)

Are you not aware there is accountability for misrepresenting the Word of God? (1 Corinthians 3:13-15), for just plucking words and phrases from the texts, with no consideration for their meaning in context?
The NT is a closed book to you.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

The above verse instructs them to follow the traditions that they were taught, so I accurately represented these verses and did not take them out of context.

A Sabbath day's journey was a measurement, limited to about 3/4 mile. It is not referring to a Sabbath Day observance.

The Mosaic Law does not state a measurement for how far someone can travel from a city on the Sabbath, so being limited to about 3/4 mile is an example of man-made tradition, which is why I cited it. I did not claim that it was referring to a Sabbath Day observance because that had nothing to do with the point I was making.

So Paul is a deceiver
, you say, when he states that "all who rely on the law are under a curse" (Galatians 3:10).

I completely agree with Paul that those who rely on works of the law instead of the Book of the Law are under a curse and have never spoken in favor of relying on works of the law in order to become justified.

So Paul, who received his teaching from Jesus Christ personally, in the third heaven, got it wrong. . .and you got it right?
What's wrong with this picture?

Anyone who disagrees with God is wrong, however, Paul said nothing to disagree with God, so he was not wrong. The people who got it wrong are those who interpret Paul as being in disagreement with God, and that is what is right with this picture.

Shoe-horning again. . we are told no such thing.

Acts 21:20-26 is one of the examples of Paul becoming "all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some" (1 Corinthians 9:22), where "to the Jews I became like a Jew. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. . ." (1 Corinthians 9:20-21).

Becoming zealous for doing good works is the the correct respond to believing in in what Jesus accomplished through the cross (Titus 2:14). The Mosaic Law is profitable for equipping the man of God to do every good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17) and that is what the Jews who were coming to faith were correctly doing and what they were rejoicing about in Acts 21:20. Yes, you trying to insert 1 Corinthians 9:20-22 into Acts 21:20-26 is a good example of shoe-horning. If Paul was intentionally sinning by deceiving people in order to win them for Christ, then that would have completely undermined the Gospel message. If you need turn Paul into a deceiver who was openly admitting to deceiving people while hoping no one caught on in order to maintain your theology, then you are cutting off the branch you are sitting on because that would mean that we can't trust anything that he said. Rather, in 1 Corinthians 9:21, Paul said in a parallel statement that he was not free from God's law, but am under Christ's law, so he was equated the Mosaic Law with the Law Christ. Furthermore, he was not speaking about deceiving people, but in context he was speaking about giving up his rights in order to meet people where they were at.

Again to remind you: there is accountability for misrepresenting the Word of God.
(1 Corinthians 3:13-15)

The Mosaic Law is the word of God (Deuteronomy 5:31-33) and I'm not the one is is misrepresenting the word of God by making it out to be speaking against obeying the word of God, so you should heed your own advice.
 
Upvote 0

Nathan@work

Always ready :)
Feb 19, 2021
1,025
360
44
Garfield
✟19,517.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Peter could have obeyed God's commands in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 and God's command in his vision by simply killing and eating one of the clean animals, but his refusal to do that was the point God was making to him in his vision. Peter did not just object by saying that he had never eaten anything that was unclean, but also added that he had never eaten anything that was common. Furthermore, if God had been abrogating His own laws, then he would have rebuked Peter for calling unclean what he had made clean, but God did not do that, rather He only rebuked Peter for calling common what He had made clean. So Peter had correctly identified the unclean animals as unclean and had correctly refrained from eating them, but he had incorrectly identified the clean animals as common and had incorrectly declined to eat them. Peter interpreted his vision three times as being in regard to incorrectly identifying Gentiles without saying a word about any of God's laws being abrogated, so his vision had nothing to do with that. In Deuteronomy 13:4-5, the way that God instructed His people to determine that someone was a false prophet or dreamer who was not speaking for Him was if they taught against obeying His law, so God simply did not leave Himself any room to abrogate any of His laws through means of a vision and that was not what He was doing.



Acts 10:28 - "He said to them: 'You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with a Gentile or visit him. But God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean.' "

I don't see how you can deny that this verse refers to a law that forbids Jews to associate or visit with a Gentile. This is not a law that is found anywhere in the Mosaic Law and is therefore a man-made law. In Galatians 2:11-16 Peter stopped associating or visiting with the Gentiles, so he was straightforwardly following this law.



2 Thessalonians 2:15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

The above verse instructs them to follow the traditions that they were taught, so I accurately represented these verses and did not take them out of context.



The Mosaic Law does not state a measurement for how far someone can travel from a city on the Sabbath, so being limited to about 3/4 mile is an example of man-made tradition, which is why I cited it. I did not claim that it was referring to a Sabbath Day observance because that had nothing to do with the point I was making.



I completely agree with Paul that those who rely on works of the law instead of the Book of the Law are under a curse and have never spoken in favor of relying on works of the law in order to become justified.



Anyone who disagrees with God is wrong, however, Paul said nothing to disagree with God, so he was not wrong. The people who got it wrong are those who interpret Paul as being in disagreement with God, and that is what is right with this picture.



Becoming zealous for doing good works is the the correct respond to believing in in what Jesus accomplished through the cross (Titus 2:14). The Mosaic Law is profitable for equipping the man of God to do every good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17) and that is what the Jews who were coming to faith were correctly doing and what they were rejoicing about in Acts 21:20. Yes, you trying to insert 1 Corinthians 9:20-22 into Acts 21:20-26 is a good example of shoe-horning. If Paul was intentionally sinning by deceiving people in order to win them for Christ, then that would have completely undermined the Gospel message. If you need turn Paul into a deceiver who was openly admitting to deceiving people while hoping no one caught on in order to maintain your theology, then you are cutting off the branch you are sitting on because that would mean that we can't trust anything that he said. Rather, in 1 Corinthians 9:21, Paul said in a parallel statement that he was not free from God's law, but am under Christ's law, so he was equated the Mosaic Law with the Law Christ. Furthermore, he was not speaking about deceiving people, but in context he was speaking about giving up his rights in order to meet people where they were at.



The Mosaic Law is the word of God (Deuteronomy 5:31-33) and I'm not the one is is misrepresenting the word of God by making it out to be speaking against obeying the word of God, so you should heed your own advice.
What do you believe Jesus accomplished at the cross?
 
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,416
4,600
Hudson
✟281,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
What do you believe Jesus accomplished at the cross?

In Titus 2:14, it described what Jesus accomplished on the cross by saying that he gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so if we believe in what he accomplished on the cross, then we will become zealous for doing good works. The Mosaic Law is God's instructions for how to do good works. In Acts 21:20, they were rejoicing that tens of thousands of Jews were coming to faith who were all zealous for the Mosaic Law, so they were showing the correct response to the Gospel message. Not all Jews were zealous for the Mosaic Law, such as those who were secular and Herodians, so that would imply that Jews were not just continuing to obey the Mosaic Law, but were becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to it because of what Jesus accomplished on the cross.
 
Upvote 0

Nathan@work

Always ready :)
Feb 19, 2021
1,025
360
44
Garfield
✟19,517.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
In Titus 2:14, it described what Jesus accomplished on the cross by saying that he gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so if we believe in what he accomplished on the cross, then we will become zealous for doing good works. The Mosaic Law is God's instructions for how to do good works. In Acts 21:20, they were rejoicing that tens of thousands of Jews were coming to faith who were all zealous for the Mosaic Law, so they were showing the correct response to the Gospel message. Not all Jews were zealous for the Mosaic Law, such as those who were secular and Herodians, so that would imply that Jews were not just continuing to obey the Mosaic Law, but were becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to it because of what Jesus accomplished on the cross.
Where do you find that the Mosaic Law is God's instruction for how to do good works?
 
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,416
4,600
Hudson
✟281,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Where do you find that the Mosaic Law is God's instruction for how to do good works?

How else do you think that the Israelites were instructed in how to do good works if not by the Mosaic Law? When Ephesians 2:8-9 says that we are not saved by works lest anyone should boast, people don't seem to have a problem identifying that as referring to the Mosaic Law. To say that God's law is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12) is to say that it teaches us how to do what is holy, righteous, and good.

In 2 Timothy 3:15-17, Paul referred to holy writings that Timothy had available to him since childhood, which could only be referring to books of the OT because none of the books of the NT had yet been written at the time of his childhood. Paul said that everything spoke by God was profitable for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness, that the man of God might be thoroughly equipped to do every good work. Those terms are all describing our conduct and the code of conduct in the OT is the Mosaic Law, so that is what Paul was primarily referring to as being profitable for equipping us to do every good work.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Nathan@work

Always ready :)
Feb 19, 2021
1,025
360
44
Garfield
✟19,517.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
How else do you think that the Israelites were instructed in how to do good works if not by the Mosaic Law? When Ephesians 2:8-9 says that we are not saved by works lest anyone should boast, people don't seem to have a problem identifying that as referring to the Mosaic Law. To say that God's law is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12) is to say that it teaches us how to do what is holy, righteous, and good.

In 2 Timothy 3:15-17, Paul referred to holy writings that Timothy had available to him since childhood, which could only be referring to books of the OT because none of the books of the NT had yet been written at the time of his childhood. Paul said that everything spoke by God was profitable for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness, that the man of God might be thoroughly equipped to do every good work. Those terms are all describing our conduct and the code of conduct in the OT is the Mosaic Law, so that is what Paul was primarily referring to as being profitable for equipping us to do every good work.

Well, I know that the Israelites did do things in accordance with the law, but I also know that God looked down on them and said there was none that did good. So it obviously did not instruct them to do good works if they were doing them and then what they were doing being 'not good' in God's eyes.

So it seems that the Law does not instruct, but rather shows what is righteous.

Probably do not see a difference do you?

The Law was given for instruction - but the instruction was to show them their bad works by showing God's righteous requirements.

The simple example used by people all the time is the speed limit sign. That sign does not instruct you to go that speed - it tells you that you should not go above that speed. The sign is simply a 'testimony' of what is required up to the point you go against it, then it instructs you of your disobedience.

The Law was to instruct them they are sinners and were in need of a Savior.

I suppose in a way it did/does instruct someone to do 'good works' if you consider the fact that belief in Christ is a 'good work'. But even that was not a "Law" that was given at Horeb, but rather one given by Christ when He came.

[Jhn 6:27-29 ESV] Do not work for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For on him God the Father has set his seal." Then they said to him, "What must we do, to be doing the works of God?" Jesus answered them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent."
 
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,416
4,600
Hudson
✟281,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Well, I know that the Israelites did do things in accordance with the law, but I also know that God looked down on them and said there was none that did good. So it obviously did not instruct them to do good works if they were doing them and then what they were doing being 'not good' in God's eyes.

In Romans 3:10, Paul was quoting from Psalms 14:1-3, where it says that no one does good out of those people who say that there is no God, so he was not denying that there was anyone who did what was good. There are many number of people who are described as righteous in the Bible, such as Noah (Genesis 6:8-9) and Zechariah and Elizabeth (Luke 1:5-6). In Revelation 19:8, fine white linen stands for the righteous deeds of the saints.

So it seems that the Law does not instruct, but rather shows what is righteous.

Probably do not see a difference do you?

The Law was given for instruction - but the instruction was to show them their bad works by showing God's righteous requirements.

The simple example used by people all the time is the speed limit sign. That sign does not instruct you to go that speed - it tells you that you should not go above that speed. The sign is simply a 'testimony' of what is required up to the point you go against it, then it instructs you of your disobedience.

When parents give instructions to their children, their goal is not to show their children how bad they are at following instructions, but to teach them how to rightly live, and this is much more true of our Heavenly Father (Deuteronomy 6:24, 10:12-13). God's law revealing our sin has significance only insofar as it leads us to repent and back to obedience through faith.

The Law was to instruct them they are sinners and were in need of a Savior.

Returning to how we were before we sinned would be selling our need for a Savior far short of what he gave himself to accomplish. In Titus 2:14, Jesus did not just give himself to redeem us from all lawlessness, but also in order to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works. In other words, we are also being made to be like our Savior.

I suppose in a way it did/does instruct someone to do 'good works' if you consider the fact that belief in Christ is a 'good work'. But even that was not a "Law" that was given at Horeb, but rather one given by Christ when He came.

[Jhn 6:27-29 ESV] Do not work for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For on him God the Father has set his seal." Then they said to him, "What must we do, to be doing the works of God?" Jesus answered them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent."

In John 6:40, those who believe in Jesus will have eternal life, and in Matthew 19:17, the way to enter eternal life is by obeying God's commandments, so obedience to God's commandments is what it means to believe in Jesus. Likewise, in John 3:36, it equates believing in Jesus with obeying him, and there are many other verses that associate belief with obedience and unbelief with disobedience. Whenever you do good works, you are are testifying about Christ's goodness and are expressing that you believe that Christ is good, or in other words, you are believing in him and our putting your faith in him as being the model for how to rightly live your life.
 
Upvote 0

Nathan@work

Always ready :)
Feb 19, 2021
1,025
360
44
Garfield
✟19,517.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
In Romans 3:10, Paul was quoting from Psalms 14:1-3, where it says that no one does good out of those people who say that there is no God, so he was not denying that there was anyone who did what was good. There are many number of people who are described as righteous in the Bible, such as Noah (Genesis 6:8-9) and Zechariah and Elizabeth (Luke 1:5-6). In Revelation 19:8, fine white linen stands for the righteous deeds of the saints.



When parents give instructions to their children, their goal is not to show their children how bad they are at following instructions, but to teach them how to rightly live, and this is much more true of our Heavenly Father (Deuteronomy 6:24, 10:12-13). God's law revealing our sin has significance only insofar as it leads us to repent and back to obedience through faith.



Returning to how we were before we sinned would be selling our need for a Savior far short of what he gave himself to accomplish. In Titus 2:14, Jesus did not just give himself to redeem us from all lawlessness, but also in order to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works. In other words, we are also being made to be like our Savior.



In John 6:40, those who believe in Jesus will have eternal life, and in Matthew 19:17, the way to enter eternal life is by obeying God's commandments, so obedience to God's commandments is what it means to believe in Jesus. Likewise, in John 3:36, it equates believing in Jesus with obeying him, and there are many other verses that associate belief with obedience and unbelief with disobedience. Whenever you do good works, you are are testifying about Christ's goodness and are expressing that you believe that Christ is good, or in other words, you are believing in him and our putting your faith in him as being the model for how to rightly live your life.

Why were those people in the Old Testament called righteous?

Personally, I do not know how people return to how they were after coming to Christ. I know some do, some have, but I do not think it is as many as some belief. I would say that most people who you find not walking with God really never have to begin with.

In Matthew 19 Jesus told the man what he had to do in order to enter life.

There is a difference between entering life and life entering us.

Only Jesus entered life, the rest of us are given His life.

I wholeheartedly believe that love working out through our actions is what 'shows' a person has Faith. Therefore, the lack of love shows a person without Faith.

"Good works" are subjective to the one judging the 'goodness' of them. Love is unmistakenable.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: pescador
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,416
4,600
Hudson
✟281,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Why were those people in the Old Testament called righteous?

In Psalms 119:29, David wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him how to obey His law. In Genesis 6:8-9, Noah found grace in the eyes of God and was a righteous man, so God was gracious to him by teaching him to obey His law and he was righteous because he obeyed through faith, which is the same one and only means that everyone else is declared righteous.

Personally, I do not know how people return to how they were after coming to Christ. I know some do, some have, but I do not think it is as many as some belief. I would say that most people who you find not walking with God really never have to begin with.

God's law is His instructions for how to walk with Him (Deuteronomy 10:12-13, Isaiah 2:2-3, Joshua 22:5, Psalms 103:7)

In Matthew 19 Jesus told the man what he had to do in order to enter life.

There is a difference between entering life and life entering us.

Only Jesus entered life, the rest of us are given His life.

You are expressing a position that you are trying to inserted into the Bible, not a position that you can show has been derived from the Bible. Nowhere does the Bible say that there is a difference entering life and life entering us or that only Jesus entered life.

I wholeheartedly believe that love working out through our actions is what 'shows' a person has Faith. Therefore, the lack of love shows a person without Faith.

Agreed and God's laws are his instructions for how to express love through our actions.

"Good works" are subjective to the one judging the 'goodness' of them. Love is unmistakenable.

It is loving someone to warn them that they are heading into danger, but that can be perceived as something other than love. Good works are the good that God has commanded.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

pescador

Wise old man
Supporter
Nov 29, 2011
8,530
4,776
✟498,844.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Why were those people in the Old Testament called righteous?

Personally, I do not know how people return to how they were after coming to Christ. I know some do, some have, but I do not think it is as many as some belief. I would say that most people who you find not walking with God really never have to begin with.

In Matthew 19 Jesus told the man what he had to do in order to enter life.

There is a difference between entering life and life entering us.

Only Jesus entered life, the rest of us are given His life.

I wholeheartedly believe that love working out through our actions is what 'shows' a person has Faith. Therefore, the lack of love shows a person without Faith.

"Good works" are subjective to the one judging the 'goodness' of them. Love is unmistakenable.

Great post!
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Nathan@work
Upvote 0