“The alternative to law is not grace; it’s lawlessness.”

[ViaCrucis]

I think a lot of the issue comes down to some deficiency in how "faith" is often defined as it is not simply an assertion of truth but a deep abiding trust. When Jesus said "if you love me, you will keep my commandments..." it's not a declaration of winning favor through following the law but a truism that keeping Christ's commandments flows out of that trust. The debate between faith and works is perpetuated on the false notion that faith can exist without works, but by its very nature faith fulfills the law.

That's basically how Luther put it, Luther says that faith does not ask if good works should be done, faith just does them. So it is impossible to separate faith and good works, just as it is impossible to separate fire and heat. Which is why St. Paul reminds us that though our works contribute nothing to our standing before God (Ephesians 2:8-9), we have still been created for good works (Ephesians 2:10).

-CryptoLutheran

 

[fhansen]

Yes.
"To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, He will give eternal life." Rom 2:7

And that won't come in the authentic way that God desires in us apart from faith, hope, and love of God and neighbor. And it all begins, from man's perspective, with faith.

 

[Der Alte]

Yes.
"To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, He will give eternal [aionios] life.[zoe]" Rom 2:7
And that won't come apart from faith, hope, and love of God and neighbor. And it all begins, from man's perspective, with faith.

Quite a few folks claim that the Greek word "aionios" never means "eternal" because it is translated "world" three times in the N.T.. Note the writer, Paul, in this vs. parallels "immortality" with "aionios zoe"/eternal life." By definition "aionios" means "eternal."
How to explain when it is translated world?" Words are often used figuratively in the Bible. See e.g., Simon was not literally a stone when Jesus named him that. Figurative. Herod was not literally a fox when Jesus called him that. Figurative. The brothers James and John were not literally "sons of thunder" when Jesus called them that. Figurative.

 

[Clare73]

Well, salting the sacrifice would be figurative of grace:
salt penetrates - grace penetrates, to the level of our heart and motives, changing them;
salt retards - grace transforms our corruption;
salt aids healing - grace heals our sin (1 Peter 2:24; see 2 Kings 2:20-22); and
salt makes untasty things acceptable - we are unacceptable to God without his grace.
Scriptures?
Colossians 4:6 - "Let your conversation be always full of grace (no corruption), seasoned with salt (which retards corruption)."
Matthew 5:13 - "You are the salt of the earth (and the decaying earth needs salt). But if salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men."
If the professing church (salt) loses its saltiness (holiness), it will no longer be good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled on by the world.
Mark 9:50 - ". . .Have salt in yourselves and be at peace with each other."
Grace retards our corruption (the source of our conflicts, James 4:1) and makes us peaceable.

These are all arguments and conclusions not definitive scripture.

Colossians 4:6 and Mark 9:50 are as definitive as they need to be to be understood.

How does salt lose it saltiness? It was adulterated. Salt was like gold. Additives were added to it to make the volume of salt larger so less salt could be sold for more gold, silver etc.

And? . .adulterated salt is what Jesus was referring to.
Unadulterated salt would be grace's operation in the church, while adulterated salt would be the adulteration of the (visible, as distinct from the invisible) church by the world.

 

[Clare73]

I have to say it, yes, there's more to it than believing a truth, and it's love that fulfills the law. And that love is available only from its Source. And the reason for faith is to realize the reconciliation with God within ourselves that Jesus came to accomplish for man-so that union may take place, a union that man was created for. Jesus reveals the true God so that we'll know Him, and by knowing we'll believe in Him-that God really exists fisrt of all-then that we'll hope/trust in Him and finally and ultimately that we'll love him.

The faith that saves by remission of sin is trust in the blood (death) of Jesus Christ to pay the penalty for one's sin (Romans 3:25).
Then the Holy Spirit reveals God to us by his operation within us as well as his illumination of the Scriptures to us.

Jesus gives us a God worth believing in. And as we do He becomes our God again. From that union and that love flow righteousness; that realtionship is the very essence of righteousness or justice for man; we're dead apart from Him.
The point is that unless God gives man righteousnss at justification then nothing is changed; we won't bother obeying Him until we begin to love as He does.

(The second Adam) Christ's righteousness is imputed at justification to all those born of Christ (Romans 4:1-11), on the pattern (Romans 5:14) of (the first) Adam's sin imputed to all those born of Adam (Romans 5:18-19).

 

[GDL]

“The alternative to law is not grace; it’s lawlessness.”

I thought it would be interesting to discuss this comment by Rousas John Rushdoony. It might not even be controversial. What do you think?

A few comments in Rushdoony's book to see why he says this:

• The things which defile a man, which render him unclean before God, come from within. Lawlessness is the substitution of man’s way for God’s way, of man’s law for God’s law. Lawlessness declares, “Yea, hath God said . . . ?” (Gen. 3:1). The outward act of lawlessness is the product of an inner defilement, which then defiles the world outside by its actions:

• The purpose of Christ’s coming was in terms of this same creation mandate. Christ as the new Adam (1 Cor. 15:45) kept the law perfectly. As the sin-bearer of the elect, Christ died to make atonement for their sins, to restore them to their position of righteousness under God. The redeemed are recalled to the original purpose of man, exercise dominion under God, to be covenant-keepers, and to fulfill “the righteousness of the law” (Rom. 8:4). The law remains central to God’s purpose. Man has been re-established into God’s original purpose and calling. Man’s justification is by the grace of God in Jesus Christ; man’s sanctification is by means of the law of God.

• Lawless Christianity is a contradiction in terms: it is anti-Christian. The purpose of grace is not to set aside the law but to fulfil the law and to enable man to keep the law. If the law was so serious in the sight of God that it would require the death of Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, to make atonement for man’s sin, it seems strange for God then to proceed to abandon the law! The goal of the law is not lawlessness, nor the purpose of grace a lawless contempt of the giver of grace.

• Moses gave the law; those who refused to hear him refused to submit to the law of God; they revealed their unregenerate nature thereby. Jesus is like unto Moses; He is the great and ultimate Lawgiver incarnate. To listen to Him is to listen to all the law and the prophets and much more. To reject Him is to deny the law and the prophets as well as His person. Every person who fails to hear Him should be “destroyed from among the people.” In Deuteronomy 18:19, which Peter quoted, the text reads, “I will require it of him.” The threat or promise of destruction appears in Exodus 12:15, 19; Leviticus 17:4, 9, etc. The ultimate meaning of “cutting off” is required here and is applied by Peter because to disobey the law-word of Jesus Christ is to be a radically lawless person.

• The basic Biblical word for law is tora (or torah). Tora means not only instruction or teaching, but, fundamentally, “direction.” The law thus gives the God-ordained direction to life; a lawless life is a directionless life in the sense that no true meaning exists apart from God. Evil is not an absence or thinness of being, but is an ethical, not a metaphysical, departure from God. The greater the departure, the greater the loss of meaning. Hell has no community or meaning. It is the collapse of all community, meaning, and life into a radical negation.

• Returning to torah, or direction, a pointing out, Jesus Christ referred to Himself as the torah when He declared, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6). The Greek word for “way” is hodos, a proceeding, a course of conduct; in Acts 13:10, Romans 11:33, and Revelation 15:3, according to Joseph Henry Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, it means “the purposes and ordinances of God, his way of dealing with men.” The use of “I am” echoed the divine name (Ex. 3:14); the reference to the “way” spoke of the law. Jesus Christ, as the incarnate God, was also the declaration of God’s righteousness and law. By this sentence, Christ made Himself inseparable from either the Godhead or from the law. He is the torah or direction of God; by His declaration, Christ made both Himself and the law more readily identifiable.
  
  The alternative to Christ and the law is thus anarchy and lawlessness; it means a life without meaning or direction. Christ is the declaration of God’s direction or law; the law points us to the right road. Sin, hamartia, is missing the mark; it does involve moving in the right direction, but it is a falling short, a missing of the mark. Anomia, sin, is lawlessness; it means moving in the wrong direction and denying direction. It is anarchy. “If we say we have no sin [hamartia], we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (1 John 1:8). It is the godless who are sinners in the sense of being anti-law, hostile to God’s direction. The word used is anomos, lawless or without law (Acts 2:3; 2 Thess. 2:8; 2 Peter 2:8). However, all men who commit sin (hamartia) habitually and carelessly are in reality not Christians and are guilty of lawlessness (anomia). “Whosoever committeth sin [hamartia, i.e., all who practice sin as their way of life] transgresseth also the law [anomia, such persons are actually anti-law, lawless]; for sin [hamartia, i.e., the habitual practice of sin] is the transgression of the law [anomia, is the practice of lawlessness]” (1 John 3:4).
  
  The law is an indictment, a death sentence, if we are headed in the wrong direction. If we move in God’s directed path, the law is a school master, guiding us all our days into God’s way of righteousness and truth. Galatians 3:24–25 states that, “after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster” (v. 25). Does this mean the end of the law? On the contrary, we now learn, not from the law as an indictment, but from Christ the way, and God our Father, how to walk in the appointed direction or in the law, “For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:26). The contrast is not between law and no law, but between “the immature life of slavery under a tutor (and) the life of sonship, with all its privileges and rights.”[xlii] Luther saw both the law and sin as abolished and declared that, “To the extent that I take hold of Christ by faith, therefore to that extent the Law has been abrogated for me.”[xliii] This is antinomianism, and alien to St. Paul. St. Paul attacked man-made laws, and man-made interpretations of the law, as the way of justification; the law can never justify; it does sanctify, and there is no sanctification by lawlessness.

Institutes of Biblical Law – Volume 1 – Searchable Rushdoony (rjrushdoony.com)

Note it's searchable. Lawless and forms he speaks of 138 times.

Grace over 200.

He's basically saying that Grace enables us to keep Law. So, the antithesis of grace is lawlessness. But, if you read the excerpts above taken from the "lawless" search, you begin to get a view of how deep this goes with Rushdoony.

 

[GDL]

Well, the word "lawlessness" is a bit of a biblical anomaly.

Not even found in the KJV, and appears three times in the NIV. Two of them in Second Thessalonians chapter two in reference to the antichrist, "the man of lawlessness", and "the secret power of lawlessness". (the spirit of antichrist - 1 John 4:3)

Therefore, this topic is attempting to build a case based on one odd verse.

And theologically seems to follow a Sabbatarian reverence to the law. Think SDA.
Yet Catholics, to my knowledge, do not observe the seventh day Sabbath as commanded. (Exodus 20:10-11)

Using the Greek forms of the word, "lawlessness" shows up 214 times, 13 of which are in the NC.

The problem is English translations. The NKJ English shows "lawlessness" 9 times in the NC.

Then we can look at "lawless" in Greek and it's used 84 times, with 6 in the NC

It's not really an anomaly and it's just a negation of the word "law". One of the easiest to recall is below, which in itself says we're still dealing with Law:

NKJ 1 John 3:4 Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness.

 

[fhansen]

“The alternative to law is not grace; it’s lawlessness.”



A few comments in Rushdoony's book to see why he says this:

• The things which defile a man, which render him unclean before God, come from within. Lawlessness is the substitution of man’s way for God’s way, of man’s law for God’s law. Lawlessness declares, “Yea, hath God said . . . ?” (Gen. 3:1). The outward act of lawlessness is the product of an inner defilement, which then defiles the world outside by its actions:

• The purpose of Christ’s coming was in terms of this same creation mandate. Christ as the new Adam (1 Cor. 15:45) kept the law perfectly. As the sin-bearer of the elect, Christ died to make atonement for their sins, to restore them to their position of righteousness under God. The redeemed are recalled to the original purpose of man, exercise dominion under God, to be covenant-keepers, and to fulfill “the righteousness of the law” (Rom. 8:4). The law remains central to God’s purpose. Man has been re-established into God’s original purpose and calling. Man’s justification is by the grace of God in Jesus Christ; man’s sanctification is by means of the law of God.

• Lawless Christianity is a contradiction in terms: it is anti-Christian. The purpose of grace is not to set aside the law but to fulfil the law and to enable man to keep the law. If the law was so serious in the sight of God that it would require the death of Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, to make atonement for man’s sin, it seems strange for God then to proceed to abandon the law! The goal of the law is not lawlessness, nor the purpose of grace a lawless contempt of the giver of grace.

• Moses gave the law; those who refused to hear him refused to submit to the law of God; they revealed their unregenerate nature thereby. Jesus is like unto Moses; He is the great and ultimate Lawgiver incarnate. To listen to Him is to listen to all the law and the prophets and much more. To reject Him is to deny the law and the prophets as well as His person. Every person who fails to hear Him should be “destroyed from among the people.” In Deuteronomy 18:19, which Peter quoted, the text reads, “I will require it of him.” The threat or promise of destruction appears in Exodus 12:15, 19; Leviticus 17:4, 9, etc. The ultimate meaning of “cutting off” is required here and is applied by Peter because to disobey the law-word of Jesus Christ is to be a radically lawless person.

• The basic Biblical word for law is tora (or torah). Tora means not only instruction or teaching, but, fundamentally, “direction.” The law thus gives the God-ordained direction to life; a lawless life is a directionless life in the sense that no true meaning exists apart from God. Evil is not an absence or thinness of being, but is an ethical, not a metaphysical, departure from God. The greater the departure, the greater the loss of meaning. Hell has no community or meaning. It is the collapse of all community, meaning, and life into a radical negation.

• Returning to torah, or direction, a pointing out, Jesus Christ referred to Himself as the torah when He declared, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6). The Greek word for “way” is hodos, a proceeding, a course of conduct; in Acts 13:10, Romans 11:33, and Revelation 15:3, according to Joseph Henry Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, it means “the purposes and ordinances of God, his way of dealing with men.” The use of “I am” echoed the divine name (Ex. 3:14); the reference to the “way” spoke of the law. Jesus Christ, as the incarnate God, was also the declaration of God’s righteousness and law. By this sentence, Christ made Himself inseparable from either the Godhead or from the law. He is the torah or direction of God; by His declaration, Christ made both Himself and the law more readily identifiable.
  
  The alternative to Christ and the law is thus anarchy and lawlessness; it means a life without meaning or direction. Christ is the declaration of God’s direction or law; the law points us to the right road. Sin, hamartia, is missing the mark; it does involve moving in the right direction, but it is a falling short, a missing of the mark. Anomia, sin, is lawlessness; it means moving in the wrong direction and denying direction. It is anarchy. “If we say we have no sin [hamartia], we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (1 John 1:8). It is the godless who are sinners in the sense of being anti-law, hostile to God’s direction. The word used is anomos, lawless or without law (Acts 2:3; 2 Thess. 2:8; 2 Peter 2:8). However, all men who commit sin (hamartia) habitually and carelessly are in reality not Christians and are guilty of lawlessness (anomia). “Whosoever committeth sin [hamartia, i.e., all who practice sin as their way of life] transgresseth also the law [anomia, such persons are actually anti-law, lawless]; for sin [hamartia, i.e., the habitual practice of sin] is the transgression of the law [anomia, is the practice of lawlessness]” (1 John 3:4).
  
  The law is an indictment, a death sentence, if we are headed in the wrong direction. If we move in God’s directed path, the law is a school master, guiding us all our days into God’s way of righteousness and truth. Galatians 3:24–25 states that, “after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster” (v. 25). Does this mean the end of the law? On the contrary, we now learn, not from the law as an indictment, but from Christ the way, and God our Father, how to walk in the appointed direction or in the law, “For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:26). The contrast is not between law and no law, but between “the immature life of slavery under a tutor (and) the life of sonship, with all its privileges and rights.”[xlii] Luther saw both the law and sin as abolished and declared that, “To the extent that I take hold of Christ by faith, therefore to that extent the Law has been abrogated for me.”[xliii] This is antinomianism, and alien to St. Paul. St. Paul attacked man-made laws, and man-made interpretations of the law, as the way of justification; the law can never justify; it does sanctify, and there is no sanctification by lawlessness.

Institutes of Biblical Law – Volume 1 – Searchable Rushdoony (rjrushdoony.com)

Note it's searchable. Lawless and forms he speaks of 138 times.

Grace over 200.

He's basically saying that Grace enables us to keep Law. So, the antithesis of grace is lawlessness. But, if you read the excerpts above taken from the "lawless" search, you begin to get a view of how deep this goes with Rushdoony.

Yes!! Thank you. I might find something to disagree with here but for the most part this is classic Christianity.

 

[Ceallaigh]

It seems to me most of the argument against being under the law is in regard to what we're allowed to eat and the seventh day sabbath. Laws about what kind of fabric our clothes are made of and how we trim our hair and beards etc. Rather than idolatry, lying, stealing, coveting, adultery etc.

 

[GDL]

Yes!! Thank you. I might find something to disagree with here but for the most part this is classic Christianity.

It's certainly not antinomian!

On the Grace front, this pretty much backs up Rushdoony's quoted statement:

NKJ Titus 2:11-15 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, 12 teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age, 13 looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, 14 who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works. 15 Speak these things, exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no one despise you.

Grace teaches us to live righteously and godly - righteously is a law term - godly is also connected to righteousness and thus law. If we don't learn under grace teaching and do the righteousness & godliness we learn, then lawlessness. Basically Rushdoony.

 

[GDL]

It seems to me most of the argument against being under the law is in regard to what we're allowed to eat and the seventh day sabbath. Laws about what kind of fabric our clothes are made of and how we trim our hair and beards etc. Rather than idolatry, lying, stealing, coveting, adultery etc.

Seems pretty typical, doesn't it.

Since the topic of this thread is a Rushdoony quote, his teachings are very extensive on law & the Christian, and all of humanity for that matter. One of his books is titled "By what Standard" and basically is an argument saying, if not God's Law, then whose? Greg Bahnsen, a student of his wrote a work entitled, By This Standard. @Hammster quotes both of these men on his identity.

I think a fascinating point of these works is in what the titles point to. So, there are the types of laws you mention, but the work is to determine why they're there rather than just throwing so much away like we've done.

 

[fhansen]

It's certainly not antinomian!

On the Grace front, this pretty much backs up Rushdoony's quoted statement:

NKJ Titus 2:11-15 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, 12 teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age, 13 looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, 14 who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works. 15 Speak these things, exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no one despise you.

Grace teaches us to live righteously and godly - righteously is a law term - godly is also connect to righteousness and thus law. If we don't learn under grace teaching and do the righteousness & godliness we learn, then lawlessness. Basically Rushdoony.

Yes, and lawlessness (sin) will still earn us death. But we don't have to die; there's; no condemnation for thiose under grace, in Christ, living by the Spirit, Rom 8:1-4

"Therefore, brothers and sisters, we have an obligation—but it is not to the flesh, to live according to it. For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live. For those who are led by the Spirit of God are the children of God." Rom 8:12-14

Just for anyone's information, Aquinas suggested that the Holy Spirit, grace, and love are all intrinsically interelated/connected.

 

[GDL]

Yes, and lawlessness (sin) will still earn us death. But we don't have to die; there's; no condemnation for thiose under grace, in Christ, living by the Spirit, Rom 8:1-4

"Therefore, brothers and sisters, we have an obligation—but it is not to the flesh, to live according to it. For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live. For those who are led by the Spirit of God are the children of God." Rom 8:12-14

Just for anyone's information, Aquinas suggested that the Holy Spirit, grace, and love are all intrinsically interelated/connected.

I noted your brief discussion with @Hammster regarding security.

I'd agree with Aquinas & even take it a bit further. One of the things I noted while copying Rushdoony's quotes was how he ties the person of Jesus Christ to Torah/Law. I agree with these ties and some of the great students of the Word see & write of them.

I've personally had times of intense studies where I've been in the Text for many days, many hours per day (from early a.m. to late evening, then some sleep & up & repeat with no phones no distractions of any kind for several days) and I reach a point of what I can only refer to as saturation. At those times I see or sense something I can only describe as a unity of everything in the Text wherein I get the sense that the entirety of it can be stated in a single word, which word has never been clear to me. It's a very odd state of mind but it's happened more than once.

I'm fascinated by what awaits us.

Back to the ties. One of the issues of these law studies and discussions is the different terminology used in the Text for things that are inextricably linked or even speaking of the same thing. It makes it tough to see and explain some things. Then there are the translation issues like I just pointed out to @Saint Steven. Some seemingly obscure things are only obscured through translations.

 

[Ceallaigh]

@Hammster quotes both of these men on his identity.

You mean his profile? This is why I have hard time understanding what you're saying.

 

[GDL]

You mean his profile?

Whatever all the quotes are under his posts. I thought identity wasn't correct but ran with it. Thanks!

 

[GDL]

You mean his profile? This is why I have hard time understanding what you're saying.

Probably not the only reason but ask & I'll try my best to explain.

Didn't think that was too important so not much effort.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Probably not the only reason but ask & I'll try my best to explain.

Didn't think that was too important so not much effort.

Correct grammar is very important.

 

[fhansen]

I noted your brief discussion with @Hammster regarding security.

I'd agree with Aquinas & even take it a bit further. One of the things I noted while copying Rushdoony's quotes was how he ties the person of Jesus Christ to Torah/Law. I agree with these ties and some of the great students of the Word see & write of them.

I've personally had times of intense studies where I've been in the Text for many days, many hours per day (from early a.m. to late evening, then some sleep & up & repeat with no phones no distractions of any kind for several days) and I reach a point of what I can only refer to as saturation. At those times I see or sense something I can only describe as a unity of everything in the Text wherein I get the sense that the entirety of it can be stated in a single word, which word has never been clear to me. It's a very odd state of mind but it's happened more than once.

I'm fascinated by what awaits us.

Back to the ties. One of the issues of these law studies and discussions is the different terminology used in the Text for things that are inextricably linked or even speaking of the same thing. It makes it tough to see and explain some things. Then there are the translation issues like I just pointed out to @Saint Steven. Some seemingly obscure things are only obscured through translations.

FWIW, the Catholic Church, regarding our "particular judgment" quotes a 16th century believer who likewise contemplated Scripture deeply, with a heart that burned for God resulting in intense prayer as well. That quote:
"At the evening of life we shall be judged on our love."

I've grown to appreciate that sentiment more and more, as a very simple yet profound truth.

 

[GDL]

Correct grammar is very important.

true but sometimes a little laziness still gets the message across in these posts. care to do some editing?

 

[GDL]

FWIW, the Catholic Church, regarding our "particular judgment" quotes a 16th century believer who likewise contemplated Scripture deeply, with a heart that burned for God resulting in intense prayer as well. That quote:
"At the evening of life we shall be judged on our love."

I've grown to appreciate that sentiment more and more, as a very simple yet profound truth.

It's worth. Thank you. I've watched you use this quote many times and can see why you quote it. It normally brings to mind Ephesians 3:14-21