Translation: You do not know what "the Law or the Prophets" are.
Here's a clue.
Jesus explained what he meant in Matt.5:17 in this post-resurrection scripture.
Was this claiming that the law was not abolished?
Luke 24:44
He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”
The way I get it when the Levites failed to teach the Law properly and so many kings did evil in the sight of the Lord, the prophetic age began with Elujah. It was a continuation of the Law since blessings were prescribed for obedience, xurses for disobedience. Israel would go into exile and bondage but latter there would be a restoration. Especially the eighth century writting prophets; Micah, Isiaha, Hosea, and Anos, spoke of another kingdom that would come. Thatvwas what they were expecting with the coming of the Messiah. We still wait for thoae great promises of the prophets to be fulfilled. Both the Law and the Prophets must be fulfilled, the Psalms being loaded with predictive prophecy. The Law itself is qulfilled when righteousness that keeps the Law is recieved in Christ, the prophecies of the prophets when Christ returns in power and glory.
How so?? You have failed to give any counter-replies to my answers to YOUR questions. That is the essence of debate which you have neglected to do. I ask you for the last time, did Jesus abolish the law? YES OR NO? If you don't answer this very simple question, don't waste time responding.
The written law did not exist in legible form until God wrote it. The text is very clear concerning this point, the written law did not exist previously to Mt Sinai.
Audible commands were given to the Hebrews prior to Mt Sinai but not the written law.
Your still cherry picking verses and failing to read the surrounding context. Please read the entire chapter slowly and carefully, then get back to me.
You act like I have never read the chapter before. I have read this chapter many times and debated it using the context with others online for many years. Please stop acting superior and just explain to me what you think the verse actually says in context. Can you explain how you believe every word in 1 John 3:15? Do you not read this verse literally? Or do you seek to make it metaphorical because you do not like what it says?
Well for me I loved the Egyptian people of my church, they were very sweet and welcoming and the Orthodox approach was definitely something that I agreed with more as for as not trying to define everything, leaving some room for mystery etc.
I actually first became a seeker when the Ben-Lomond (Concilliar press) Church split crisis was starting to develop. I loved going there, at the time great worship, but never quite got the feeling that I should join. Right after I stopped attending, like a week or two is when the Schism started!
So I think that was the Holy Spirit leading!
Well, you are half right. The works that Paul condemned were the works of the Law of Moses like "circumcision" (Which no longer applied in the New Covenant). What you will not find in the New Testament is the condemnation of works of faith after one is saved by God's grace. What you will not find is the condemnation to love God, and to love your neighbor as a part of eternal life. What you will not find is the condemnation to keep the Moral Law as a part of salvation.
After the Death of Christ, the New Testament condemns:
(a) Going back to the OT ceremonial laws as a part of salvation.
(b) Being saved by Works Alone without God's grace through faith in Jesus Christ.
Jason0047 said:
This is evident if you were to read the beginning of Ephesians 2. Paul talks about initial acceptance of Christ in the beginning of this chapter. "And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins" (Ephesians 2:1). Being quickened is a one time event. Ephesians 3 says, "That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love," (Ephesians 3:17).
But you are not telling me what that greater context is by pointing it out to me. Your just saying that and not given me any Scriptural explanation on the matter. I provided the context of Ephesians 2:8-9, and it is talking about being quickened (which is a one time act when somebody first accepts Christ - See again Ephesians 2:1). I believe again that you simply do not like this truth, and so you choose to ignore because it does not line up with your Soteriology. Unless of course you want to explain the greater context or something.
You said:
That's not what James is really saying in his letter, Jason. James is simply emphasizing that perfect faith arises from application of love towards everyone.
James 2:22
You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected.
The outcome is a perfect faith, James is not saying faith plus works saves you. James is saying faith without works is simply not a perfect faith.
You are not reading the entire context and believing James 2:17-18.
James 2:17 says faith without works is dead.
Can a dead faith save anyone?
No. Only a living and active faith can save.
In James 2:18, James says he will show his faith by his works (i.e. his works of faith).
So again, if there is no works, there is no faith.
Can you be saved without faith?
No. Most certainly not.
James 2:24 says that we are justified by works and not by faith alone (or faith only).
Meaning, we need more than just a belief (faith) but we need works of faith.
Otherwise our faith is like that of demons (See James 2:19).
Otherwise our faith is dead like the body is dead without the spirit (James 2:26).
Jason0047 said:
1 John 1:7 says if we walk in the light, the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin.
So I am just to believe you for no good reason over what 1 John 1:7 says plainly?
Surely not. Again, it means what it says.
If we walk in the light, the blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from all sin.
Walking in the light = Keeping God's commandments (Compare 1 John 1:7 with 1 John 2:3).
Walking in darkness = Not keeping God's commandments (Compare 1 John 1:6 with 1 John 2:4).
Keeping God's commandments is similar to loving one's brother (abiding in the light).
Not keeping God's commandments is similar to not loving one's brother (abiding in darkness).
9 "He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now.
10 He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him.
11 But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes." (1 John 2:9-11).
Besides, Hebrews 5:9 also says a similar thing as 1 John 1:7, too. Hebrews 5:9 says that Jesus is the author of eternal salvation to all who OBEY Him. So yeah; It's more than a belief alone in Jesus when it comes to eternal salvation.
You said:
Believing in Jesus means you will listen to Jesus and follow Him.
Before you were arguing otherwise.
For if you truly believe this then you would believe in works of faith follows God's saving grace through faith like I do. But you don't. So you really do not believe that believing in Jesus has to include listening to Jesus and following Him. For you are against the idea that sin can separate a believer from God. So no kind of lack of work or lack of obedience can condemn a Christian in your view. So no. You really don't believe that if a believer trusts in Jesus they will listen and follow Jesus. Such a thing is not necessary, and if it is not necessary, then folks are not going to do what is not necessary. But lets say for the sake of argument that you are one of those OSAS proponents who believes that every saint or true believer will be regenerated to do good works every time without fail. This view is also not taught in the Scriptures, either.
Here is a list of Scripture verses on how we are told that we need to endure, overcome, resist temptation as a part of eternal life:
We need to endure in our faith to continue to be saved:
"But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;" Hebrews 3:13-14.
"Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him." James 1:12.
"But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.” Matthew 24:13.
"...be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life." Revelation 2:10.
"He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God." Revelation 2:7.
"He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death." Revelation 2:11.
"He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels." Revelation 3:5.
"Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life." Jude 1:21.
You said:
You must avoid contradicting the idea that Paul presented. Your righteousness, your salvation in Christ, is a free given granted to you by grace. If you contradict the concept of the free gift, then you are in conflict with the apostle.
You contradict yourself. You say on the one hand you are saved by a belief alone (Which implies that a believer can sin and still be saved). Yet, on the other hand you say that a believer will follow Jesus. The thing is you cannot do both. One is either sinning or they are following Jesus. Jesus said we cannot serve two masters.
As for gifts:
I can receive a car as a free gift, but if I drive with a flat tire at tops speeds (ignoring general maintenance), or if I run red lights, drive drunk, and or hit pedestrians, it is highly possible that I will not have my free gift (a car) for very long. The same is true if a man considers his wife as a gift from the Lord (that he has prayed for). Does that mean that the man can cheat on his wife (who he regards as a free gift from God) with him expecting her to stay with him? No. The man has to put forth works of responsibility in showing that he is faithful and loving towards her to maintain that relationship (Which is a gift from God).
So there is a difference between works of responsibility in possessing a free gift, vs. doing works at a job so as to earn money or some form of payment in return for the effort put in.
You said:
Jesus is the author of our salvation, we don't co-write that script.
But you do need to meet the conditions (Which is to OBEY Him according to Hebrews 5:9).
You said:
Salvation itself is a free gift given to all those who call on the name of Jesus. The fruit of the Spirit is also a gift, everything is from above and never has any origin in us.
God does not force salvation upon anyone. We have to cooperate with God. Salvation is synergistic. Otherwise there would be no warnings given to us in the Bible about overcoming, or sin, etc.
You said:
You are saved, yesterday, today, and forever. Now walk in that faith!
This is man made statement that has no basis in Scripture. The Bible does not teach future sin is forgiven you. That's wrong to even teach that. For if you do teach it, such a thing will lead others to think they can turn God's grace into a license for immorality (Whether you want that to happen or not). For if there was no consequences anymore in obeying the speed limit on the high ways, more people would speed and get into car accidents. Thus, as a result, more people would get hurt and killed.
Jason0047 said:
For example: If Rick said that his old rocking chair on his porch was able to hold his weight, and he said he believed that with all his heart, would he truly be showing forth that his statement of faith was true if he never sat in the chair? Especially if he was asked to sit in it and yet he refused to do so? In other words, if Rick believed that his porch chair would hold his weight (and he told others this), he would no doubt take the action necessary by sitting in that chair to prove that such a statement was true. Otherwise it would just be an empty profession of faith. In other words, if a person says they love God, and they have no visible good fruit to show that such a thing is true, then it would be just an empty profession of faith that they love God.
Love is a gift given to us, love others as Christ FIRST loved us. We are not saved on the basis of our love, we are always saved on what Christ first did for us, Christ reconciled us.
If you are not careful you will stumble into a faith/works heresy.
The Lord our God is a God of order and logic. He made parables to illustrate spiritual truth. This is something that your belief cannot do. Your belief cannot support basic morality in a real world scenario. This is why your belief is simply not true (and you know it deep down).
For the heresy is not in doing good as a part of being in God's Kingdom; The heresy is in sinning and in disobeying God and treating God's grace as a license for immorality. God is good; And He will not condone a person's thinking that they can do evil and be rewarded with the goodness of His Kingdom. It simply does not work like that.
You said:
This does not alter the defined gospel that the apostle Paul presented. No interpretation, no massage of the scripture can rewrite the gospel of grace.
No. The gospel is tied to obedience and or holy living (Sanctification):
Proof #1. - 2 Thessalonians 2:13-14.
13 “...God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvationthrough sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (2 Thessalonians 2:13-14).
Proof #2. - Romans 16:25-26.
25 “Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,
26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:” (Romans 16:25-26).
Proof #3. - 1 Thessalonians 1:8-9 and 1 Thessalonians 1:11-12.
8 “In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, andthat obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;” (1 Thessalonians 1:8-9).
11 “Wherefore also we pray always for you, that our God would count you worthy of this calling, and fulfil all the good pleasure of his goodness, and the work of faith with power:
12 That the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may be glorified in you, and ye in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.” (2 Thessalonians 1:11-12).
The way I get it when the Levites failed to teach the Law properly and so many kings did evil in the sight of the Lord, the prophetic age began with Elujah. It was a continuation of the Law since blessings were prescribed for obedience, xurses for disobedience. Israel would go into exile and bondage but latter there would be a restoration. Especially the eighth century writting prophets; Micah, Isiaha, Hosea, and Anos, spoke of another kingdom that would come. Thatvwas what they were expecting with the coming of the Messiah. We still wait for thoae great promises of the prophets to be fulfilled. Both the Law and the Prophets must be fulfilled, the Psalms being loaded with predictive prophecy. The Law itself is qulfilled when righteousness that keeps the Law is recieved in Christ, the prophecies of the prophets when Christ returns in power and glory.
How so?? You have failed to give any counter-replies to my answers to YOUR questions. That is the essence of debate which you have neglected to do. I ask you for the last time, did Jesus abolish the law? YES OR NO? If you don't answer this very simple question, don't waste time responding.
I'll have to define what "the law" is for you, since you are incapable of doing so.
And also point out that the verse in question does not say "the law", it says "the Law or the Prophets". Jesus did not come to abolish the books of the Law or the books of the Prophets. The prophecies about him in those books were and still are valid. He did however come to abolish "the law". Defined as the law that God gave to the Israelites alone through Moses. Therefore "the law" (small "l") is contained within "the Law" (capital "L"). Got it?
You don't, they are fulfilled not abolished. Christ didn't come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it as well. The closest thing I can find, even for the Mosaic Law is this:
Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross. (Col. 1:14)
Now this doesn't abolish the law, it basically remits our indebtedness to the Law because of sin. I don't know where you getting this 'abolish' stuff because it doesn't line up with the New Testament witness. The Law itself is a perpetual ordinance, it cannot be abolished because it's based on the righteousness of God, which cannot change. Are you trying to make some kind of a point here because you are losing me.
I'll have to define what "the law" is for you, since you are incapable of doing so.
And also point out that the verse in question does not say "the law", it says "the Law or the Prophets". Jesus did not come to abolish the books of the Law or the books of the Prophets. The prophecies about him in those books were and still are valid. He did however come to abolish "the law". Defined as the law that God gave to the Israelites alone through Moses. Therefore "the law" (small "l") is contained within "the Law" (capital "L"). Got it?
The Levitical Law certainly changed, the sacrifices, the feasts, sabbaths, circumcision and that sort of thing have been set aside, they were shadows of things to come, the substance is found in Christ. I don't get this 'the Law was abolished' stuff, I'm not getting anything like that from the New Testament witness.
You don't, they are fulfilled not abolished. Christ didn't come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it as well. The closest thing I can find, even for the Mosaic Law is this:
Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross. (Col. 1:14)
Now this doesn't abolish the law, it basically remits our indebtedness to the Law because of sin. I don't know where you getting this 'abolish' stuff because it doesn't line up with the New Testament witness. The Law itself is a perpetual ordinance, it cannot be abolished because it's based on the righteousness of God, which cannot change. Are you trying to make some kind of a point here because you are losing me.
Were the Ten Commandments engraved in letters on stone?
If so, the Apostle says they were the transitory ministry that brought condemnation and death that has no glory now. The letter kills. -- Other than that, pretty awesome.
2 Corinthians 3:6-11
He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. 7 Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, transitory though it was, 8 will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? 9 If the ministry that brought condemnation was glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! 10 For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11 And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!
The Levitical Law certainly changed, the sacrifices, the feasts, sabbaths, circumcision and that sort of thing have been set aside, they were shadows of things to come, the substance is found in Christ. I don't get this 'the Law was abolished' stuff, I'm not getting anything like that from the New Testament witness.
I may have already shared this one with you. The first covenant is obsolete.
Hebrews 8:7, 13
7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. ...
13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.
Exodus 34:28
Moses was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights without eating bread or drinking water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant—the Ten Commandments.
Were the Ten Commandments engraved in letters on stone?
If so, the Apostle says they were the transitory ministry that brought condemnation and death that has no glory now. The letter kills. -- Other than that, pretty awesome.
2 Corinthians 3:6-11
He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. 7 Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, transitory though it was, 8 will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? 9 If the ministry that brought condemnation was glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! 10 For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11 And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!
Greater yes, certainly the ministry that brings righteousness is more glorious then the one that brought condemnation. Every doctrine of the Christian faith will begin with the fact that you are a sinner, Paul elaborates on this for 2 and a half chapters before his pivotal 'but now' in Romans 3:21. The Law brought that condemnation and so did God's natural revelation and the law of conscience. The Ten Commandments are clearly in light here since that is the only part of the Law that was engraved in stone. Every single one of those commandments are affirmed in the New Testament in one way or the other, Jesus himself said I came not to abolish the Law but to fulfill it.
Yes, the revelation of the righteousness that is by faith is superior to the institution of the Mosaic Law, you will get no argument from me. But that's not the same thing as abolished.
I may have already shared this one with you. The first covenant is obsolete.
Hebrews 8:7, 13
7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. ...
13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.
Exodus 34:28
Moses was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights without eating bread or drinking water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant—the Ten Commandments.
Yes, but it's obsolete because the sins under the old covenant have been forgiven in Christ, the arbitrator, the greater High Priest the Aaron. The old covenant was weakened because of our infirmities not because there was anything wrong with the Ten Commandments. God keeps a copy of the original Law in the Ark of the Covenant in heaven, they haven't been disposed of. The new covenant provides righteousness which is something the old covenant couldn't. Try reading the blessings and curses under the Law in Deuteronomy 28, because Israel broke every one of those commandments. Do a little cross referencing in Romans and you find so has everyone else.
Jesus warns that the Law is not going to be abolished, that was not his purpose, he came not to destroy the Law but to fulfill it:
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven. (Matt. 5:17-20)
Jesus literally says he did not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it, there is no getting around that one.
I'll have to define what "the law" is for you, since you are incapable of doing so.
And also point out that the verse in question does not say "the law", it says "the Law or the Prophets". Jesus did not come to abolish the books of the Law or the books of the Prophets. The prophecies about him in those books were and still are valid. He did however come to abolish "the law". Defined as the law that God gave to the Israelites alone through Moses. Therefore "the law" (small "l") is contained within "the Law" (capital "L"). Got it?
Are you serious? You arbitrarily limit the writings of the prophets to only include prophecies about him/Jesus while neglecting to remember that the prophets wrote about many other things in their writings as well. Thus you choose to emphasize one thing while wholly ignoring the rest of the prophets' writings as you consequently engage in selective eisegesis which makes for poor interpretation. Jesus never abolished any writings of the prophets which includes all of their writings and not just their prophecies as you imagine.
Moreover your explanation of the law is drawn out of thin air as do you not realize that the word law can be written in either caps or not? As a matter of fact, the Koine Greek originally was only written in capital letters. Only centuries later on, were lower case letters employed in order to make reading easier. Thus there is no difference between the Law and the law as you vividly imagine. The Greek word for law/Law is nomos. Nomos is not distinguished by upper caps and lower caps as you claim.
If you even attempted to simply check the various English translations, you would have noticed that they either use upper case or lower case letters in translating nomos - no difference. New International Version
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. King James Bible
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. American Standard Version
Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil.
Yes, but it's obsolete because the sins under the old covenant have been forgiven in Christ, the arbitrator, the greater High Priest the Aaron. The old covenant was weakened because of our infirmities not because there was anything wrong with the Ten Commandments. God keeps a copy of the original Law in the Ark of the Covenant in heaven, they haven't been disposed of. The new covenant provides righteousness which is something the old covenant couldn't. Try reading the blessings and curses under the Law in Deuteronomy 28, because Israel broke every one of those commandments. Do a little cross referencing in Romans and you find so has everyone else.
Jesus warns that the Law is not going to be abolished, that was not his purpose, he came not to destroy the Law but to fulfill it:
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven. (Matt. 5:17-20)
Jesus literally says he did not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it, there is no getting around that one.
