Gal 4 "under the Law" vs "under Grace" in Romans 6 and not sinning

[Travis93]

The end of anything means its over as in finished/completed.

bugkiller

Then how do you interpret this verse?
1 Peter 1:9 Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.

 

[disciple1]

Then how do you interpret this verse?
1 Peter 1:9 Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.

Maybe this will help, but study your bible.
Romans chapter 9 verses 30-Romans chapter 10 verse 4
What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it. Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone. As it is written: See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame. Brothers my heart's desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved. For I can testify about them that they are Zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own the did not submit to God's righteousness, Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.

 

[bugkiller]

Then how do you interpret this verse?
1 Peter 1:9 Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.

Salvation is the result/goal of faith.

I know you're trying to get me to say that salvation is over. To bad. Got another sucker punch?

bugkiller

 

[BobRyan]

It can be surprising and difficult to predict when someone will post a Galatians 4 post on a Colossians 2 thread.

He does compare the Sinai covenant to bondage in Galatians chapter 4.

Gal 4:24　 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.　

Gal 4:25　 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

Later Paul compels the Galatian believers to "cast out" the Sinai covenant of "bondage".

Gal 4:30　 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.　

Gal 4:31　 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.　

The inheritance does not come through the Sinai covenant.

And for that - we this... the OP!


=========================================

The term "under the LAW" in Gal 4 -- in its most favorable light - means under the obligation of the ceremonial law apart from faith. But in general Paul uses the term with respect to condemnation under the moral of God without the Gospel benefit of salvation.

The end of Galatians 4 is not about condemning the Word of God in the OT - it is the use of an allegory to demonstrate that the LAW of God is not a second-gospel a competing-gospel and never was. Period.

Gal 4
21 Tell me, you who want to be under law, do you not listen to the law?

<Paul is not saying "tell me you want want to affirm scripture - the Word of God -- how dare you not condemn scripture" > Rather Paul is addressing those who want to use the Law as a gospel.

Gal 4
22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the bondwoman and one by the free woman. 23 But the son by the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and the son by the free woman through the promise. 24 This is allegorically speaking, for these women are two covenants: one proceeding from Mount Sinai bearing children who are to be slaves; she is Hagar. 25 Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. 26 But the Jerusalem above is free; she is our mother. 27 For it is written,

“Rejoice, barren woman who does not bear;
Break forth and shout, you who are not in labor;
For more numerous are the children of the desolate
Than of the one who has a husband.”

NOTE: "Jerusalem above" was there in both OT and NT times. This is not a condemnation of the OT text of scripture. In fact it is in the OT that we find the NEW Covenant "I will write My LAWS on their heart and mind" Jer 31:31-33 - what is more "for it is written" is a reference to the still-authoritative OT text - as scripture.

Gal 4
28 And you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29 But as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now also. 30 But what does the Scripture say?

“Cast out the bondwoman and her son,
For the son of the bondwoman shall not be an heir with the son of the free woman.”

31 So then, brethren, we are not children of a bondwoman, but of the free woman.

NOTE: "Him who is born of the Spirit" is the same pre-cross teaching we see from Christ in John 3 - speaking to Nicodemus. Far from being a condemnation of pre-cross teaching - it affirms it.


================================
Rom 9
30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone.

1 John 3:4 - "SIN IS transgression of the LAW" both in OT and also by NT standards

So then in Rom 6 Paul speaks about the obligation not to SIN - even though not "under the law" -- not under the condemnation of the LAW.

Rom 6
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! 16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered

1 john 2:1 "these things I write to you that you sin NOT"

The Covenant at Sinai with Israel included
"Love your neighbor as yourself" Lev 19:18

And 40 years later Moses reminds them --
"Love God with all your heart" Deut 6:5

Christ continues to affirm them in Matt 22 , pre-cross - the Law of Moses upheld.

So then why is Paul associating Sinai with the old covenant in Gal 4?

Because the ceremonial law is no longer in effect.

1 Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" as compared to the ceremonial laws such as circumcision - as we see in this example from 1Cor 7:19

notice how Christ upholds what "Moses said" in Mark 7 calling it "The WORD of GOD"

Mark 7

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

John 14:15 "IF you Love Me - KEEP My Commandments"

"Love ME and KEEP My Commandments" Ex 20:6 -- from the TEN Commandments.

No wonder NT authors affirm the TEN Commandments as part of the moral law of God for the saints even in the NT as we see here
14 minutes ago #1


Heb 8:6-10 Christ's New Covenant and His TEN Commandments at Sinai
6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.

A New Covenant
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second. 8 For finding fault with them, He says,

“Behold, days are coming, says the Lord,
When I will effect a New Covenant
With the house of Israel and with the house of Judah;
9 Not like the covenant which I made with their fathers
On the day when I took them by the hand
To lead them out of the land of Egypt;
For they did not continue in My covenant,
And I did not care for them, says the Lord.
10 “For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
After those days, says the Lord:
I will put My laws into their minds,
And I will write them on their hearts.
And I will be their God,
And they shall be My people.

 

[BobRyan]

Christian forums doesn't believe you have to obey the law to be saved .

They don't believe that obeying the law saves you - but CF does not believe you can murder and blaspheme your way into the kingdom either.

And the Bible? what does the Bible say? Romans 2:13 for starters.

Ephesians 6:2 might be a good text to read.

1Corinthians 7:19 as well.

Revelation 14:12 another good text not to ignore for good objective unbiased Bible students.

 

[BABerean2]

The term "under the LAW" in Gal 4 -- in its most favorable light - means under the obligation of the ceremonial law apart from faith. But in general Paul uses the term with respect to condemnation under the moral of God without the Gospel benefit of salvation.

You are attempting to divide the Sinai covenant into "ceremonial law" and "moral law" in the same way that those of Reformed Covenant Theology have done in an attempt to claim that the New Covenant is a "New Administration" of the Old Covenant. For someone who is SDA this is a way to hang onto the "sign" of the Sinai Covenant.

The problem for you is that Paul never divided up the "law" into parts.

He knew that the 10 commandments are the Sinai covenant and that the 600+ other ordinances written down by Moses were the method of how to keep the covenant given to Moses by God.

The following verse proves that your effort at division of the law of Moses does not agree with what is plainly written in God's Word.

Exo_34:28　 So he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he neither ate bread nor drank water. And He wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments.

The Ten Commandments written on stone are the covenant.

In Galatians 4:24 Paul speaks of two covenants.

The battle between those two covenants is continuing at present, because some of us refuse to "cast out the bondwoman", also described as "the ministry of death".


Co 3:6　 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.　

2Co 3:7　 But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away,　

2Co 3:8　 how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious?
　
.

 

[BobRyan]

You are attempting to divide the Sinai covenant into "ceremonial law" and "moral law" in the same way that those of Reformed Covenant Theology have done
.

Correction -- "in the same way that Paul does in 1Cor 7:19... and in the same way as C.H. Spurgeon does in the Baptist Confession of Faith,.... and the same way as the RCC does in Dies Domini and the CCC... and in the same way as the Westminster Confession of Faith does ... "

It is not just the Bible that the view you hold to opposes - it is all the major Christian denomination's statements of faith.

 

[BobRyan]

For someone who is SDA this is a way to hang onto the "sign" of the Sinai Covenant.

.

I am amazed that your argument is reduced to claiming that all major Christian denominations and their statements of faith are simply all SDA, simply because they affirm Paul in his 1 Cor 7:19 distinction between ceremonial law and moral law of the TEN Commandments!!

The sad thing is that this effort to blame what we find in the Bible - on "SDA"s - does not work - because all major Christian groups have scholarship affirming the Bible in 1 Cor 7:19 and admitting that the Ten Commandments are included in the moral law of God - written on the heart and mind under the NEW Covenant.

When the argument needs to ignore so many "details" to survive - it is a wake-up call.

I think we all can see that.

 

[BobRyan]

The NEW Covenant of Jer 31:31-33 and Hebrews 8:6-10 includes the "LAW OF GOD" written on the heart and mind - as Jeremiah reminds us.

 

[BABerean2]

Correction -- "in the same way that Paul does in 1Cor 7:19... and in the same way as C.H. Spurgeon does in the Baptist Confession of Faith,.... and the same way as the RCC does in Dies Domini and the CCC... and in the same way as the Westminster Confession of Faith does ... "

It is not just the Bible that the view you hold to opposes - it is all the major Christian denomination's statements of faith.

You have inadvertently put your finger on the problem.
There are not to be any denominations.
It is one Church whose doctrine is not built upon the writings of any man or any woman, but solely upon the Word of God.

Yes, Spurgeon and many others were giants of the faith.
However, their words can never be used as the source of truth.

1Co 1:10　 Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.　
1Co 1:11　 For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe's household, that there are contentions among you.　
1Co 1:12　 Now I say this, that each of you says, "I am of Paul," or "I am of Apollos," or "I am of Cephas," or "I am of Christ."　
1Co 1:13　 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?　

.

The "wake up call" is found in the sermon above, given by a man who at one time taught Reformed Covenant Theology.

However, he had to let it go because he could not get it to line up with his Bible.

 

[BobRyan]

You are attempting to divide the Sinai covenant into "ceremonial law" and "moral law" in the same way that those of Reformed Covenant Theology have done... For someone who is SDA this is a way to hang onto the "sign" of the Sinai Covenant.
.

Correction -- "in the same way that Paul does in 1Cor 7:19... and in the same way as C.H. Spurgeon does in the Baptist Confession of Faith,.... and the same way as the RCC does in Dies Domini and the CCC... and in the same way as the Westminster Confession of Faith does ... "

It is not just the Bible that the view you hold to opposes - it is all the major Christian denomination's statements of faith.

You have inadvertently put your finger on the problem.
There are not to be any denominations.

It is your post that drags in "what denomination are you" into the discussion. And when you try revisionism to make this "just about SDA's" I point out that you are ignoring the fact that Bible scholarship on both sides of that isle admits to the Ten Commandments as moral law vs circumcision as ceremonial.

Were we simply "not supposed to notice"?

Yes, Spurgeon and many others were giants of the faith.
However, their words can never be used as the source of truth.

Misdirection - I gave the Bible as the source of truth - the Bible texts you are still ignoring. It was you that then resorted to the idea that only SDAs would notice these Bible truths - so since you switched to 'denominationalism' as your argument -- I point out that this objectivity where both side - both pro-Sunday and pro-Bible Sabbath agree to the TEN Commandments as the moral law of God - is a level of objectivity your position does not display.

(BTW as for ecumenism - we are the 5th largest Christian denomination in the world according to Christianity Today - 2015 so I would not complain if everyone decided to join us .. I never argue against one church if everyone would agree to that)

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BABerean2]

Bible scholarship on both sides of that isle admits to the Ten Commandments as moral law vs circumcision as ceremonial.

Show the term "moral law" or "ceremonial law" in the scriptures, if you want to show Bible scholarship...

They are manmade inventions.

.

 

[Bob S]

it really amazes me that a member of a church that has blasted all other churches and called them Babylon would even think about using their words to bolster his claim.
Ellen White came out of the Methodist Church and they are the ones who taught her that the Torah was part moral and part ceremonial. Her claim about Col 2 was that it was the ceremonial part of the law that was nailed to the Cross. What amazes me is that after claiming that she cherry picked tithing and unclean from the laws that she claimed were abrogated. It also amazes me that otherwise great people would fall for all the falsehood she regurgitated.

 

[BobRyan]

it really amazes me that a member of a church that has blasted all other churches and called them Babylon would even think about using their words to bolster his claim. .

It amazes me that the details of the subject are so opposed to your wild speculations that in your post you merely resort to character attacks -- avoiding the details in the topic entirely.

Objectivity is apparently foreign to those who need to avoid the details in the subject posted.

 

[BobRyan]

You are attempting to divide the Sinai covenant into "ceremonial law" and "moral law" in the same way that those of Reformed Covenant Theology have done... For someone who is SDA this is a way to hang onto the "sign" of the Sinai Covenant.
.

Correction -- "in the same way that Paul does in 1Cor 7:19... and in the same way as C.H. Spurgeon does in the Baptist Confession of Faith,.... and the same way as the RCC does in Dies Domini and the CCC... and in the same way as the Westminster Confession of Faith does ... "

It is not just the Bible that the view you hold to opposes - it is all the major Christian denomination's statements of faith.

You have inadvertently put your finger on the problem.
There are not to be any denominations.

It is your post that drags in "what denomination are you" into the discussion. And when you try revisionism to make this "just about SDA's" I point out that you are ignoring the fact that Bible scholarship on both sides of that isle admits to the Ten Commandments as moral law vs circumcision as ceremonial.

Were we simply "not supposed to notice"?

Yes, Spurgeon and many others were giants of the faith.
However, their words can never be used as the source of truth.

Misdirection - I gave the Bible as the source of truth - the Bible texts you are still ignoring. It was you that then resorted to the idea that only SDAs would notice these Bible truths - so since you switched to 'denominationalism' as your argument -- I point out that this objectivity where both side - both pro-Sunday and pro-Bible Sabbath agree to the TEN Commandments as the moral law of God - is a level of objectivity your position does not display.

(BTW as for ecumenism - we are the 5th largest Christian denomination in the world according to Christianity Today - 2015 so I would not complain if everyone decided to join us .. I never argue against one church if everyone would agree to that)

Show the term "moral law" or "ceremonial law" in the scriptures, if you want to show Bible scholarship...

They are manmade inventions.
.

Hint: the contrast is seen in 1Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" as compared to ceremony like circumcision.

As has been posted 7 or 8 dozen times so far -- I think

 

[BobRyan]

as for Bible scholarship affirming this "detail".

the Baptist Confession of Faith as edited by C.H. Spurgeon

=================================

Baptist Confession of Faith Section 19

Section 19:

C.H. Spurgeon's edition of the "Baptist Confession of Faith"
-- CH Spurgeon

The Perpetuity of the Law of God

Very great mistakes have been made about the law. Not long ago there were those about us who affirmed that the law is utterly abrogated and abolished, and they openly taught that believers were not bound to make the moral law the rule of their lives. What would have been sin in other men they counted to be no sin in themselves. From such Antinomianism as that may God deliver us. We are not under the law as the method of salvation, but we delight to see the law in the hand of Christ, and desire to obey the Lord in all things. Others have been met with who have taught that Jesus mitigated and softened down the law, and they have in effect said that the perfect law of God was too hard for imperfect beings, and therefore God has given us a milder and easier rule. These tread dangerously upon the verge of terrible error, although we believe that they are little aware of it.​

Section 19 of the "Baptist Confession of Faith" .
Section 19​

. The Law of God

• God gave to Adam a law of universal obedience which was written in his heart, and He gave him very specific instruction about not eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. By this Adam and all his descendants were bound to personal, total, exact, and perpetual obedience, being promised life upon the fulfilling of the law, and threatened with death upon the breach of it. At the same time Adam was endued with power and ability to keep it.

• The same law that was first written in the heart of man continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness after the Fall, and was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai in the TEN COMMANDMENTS, and written in two tables, the first four containing our duty towards God, and the other six, our duty to man.

• Besides this law, commonly called the moral law, God was pleased do give the people of Israel ceremonial laws containing several typical ordinances. These ordinances were partly about their worship, and in them Christ was prefigured along with His attributes and qualities, His actions, His sufferings and His benefits. These ordinances also gave instructions about different moral duties. All of these ceremonial laws were appointed only until the time of reformation, when Jesus Christ the true Messiah and the only lawgiver, Who was furnished with power from the Father for this end, cancelled them and took them away. ​

• To the people of Israel He also gave sundry judicial laws which expired when they ceased to be a nation. These are not binding on anyone now by virtue of their being part of the laws of that nation, but their general equity continue to be applicable in modern times.

The moral law ever binds to obedience everyone, justified people as well as others, and not only out of regard for the matter contained in it, but also out of respect for the authority of God the Creator, Who gave the law. Nor does Christ in the Gospel dissolve this law in any way, but He considerably strengthens our obligation to obey it __________________​

===============================
More references to the "Moral law of God"

The moral law ever binds to obedience everyone, justified people as well as others,

Besides this law, commonly called the moral law, God was pleased do give the people of Israel ceremonial laws

 

[BABerean2]

Hint: the contrast is seen in 1Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" as compared to ceremony like circumcision.

Someone is confused.
It is either you or the Apostle Paul.

Paul describes the Sinai covenant as "the law" in multiple passages.
I have never found a passage where Paul described the Sinai covenant as "the laws".

In Galatians chapter 4 Paul compares the Sinai covenant to bondage and compels the Galatian believers to "cast out" the Sinai covenant of bondage.

However, in verse 24 Paul says there are "two covenants".
What is this other covenant, if it is not the Sinai covenant?

It has to be the New Covenant Paul described in 2 Corinthians 3:6 and found in Hebrews 12:22-24.

Christ gave two commandments, which are repeated in 1st John.

1Jn 3:22　 And whatever we ask we receive from Him, because we keep His commandments and do those things that are pleasing in His sight.　
1Jn 3:23　 And this is His commandment: that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ and love one another, as He gave us commandment.　
1Jn 3:24　 Now he who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. And by this we know that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us.

However, you are an expert in the old method of "bait and switch".

You always force the word "commandment" or "commandments" to be the Sinai covenant no matter whether it is the "commandment" given to Abraham or those mentioned by Paul.

Why?

Because you cannot "cast out" the bondwoman.

.

　

 

[BobRyan]

Someone is confused.
It is either you or the Apostle Paul.

　

It's probably you.

Like I said no one obeys the Sabbath. .

In Romans 8 Paul does admit to a certain group of the lost who do not submit to the Law of God "neither indeed can they".

Rom 8
He condemned sin in the flesh, 4 so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5 For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. 6 For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, 7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, 8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

You missed the chapter before that.
Romans chapter 7
4 So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. 5 For when we were in the realm of the flesh,[a] the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. 6 But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

You missed Chapter 7 and the chapter before that

Romans 6
6 What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase? 2 May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it?

What IS SIN?
"SIN IS Transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4 - even in the NT

Romans 6
6 knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin; 7 for he who has died is freed from sin.

10 For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. 11 Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus.

12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts, 13 and do not go on presenting the members of your body to sin as instruments of unrighteousness; but present yourselves to God as those alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be! 16 Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed, 18 and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. 19 I am speaking in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness, resulting in further lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness, resulting in sanctification.

20 For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. 21 Therefore what benefit were you then deriving from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the outcome of those things is death. 22 But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you derive your benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

 

[BobRyan]

In Galatians chapter 4 Paul compares the Sinai covenant to bondage and compels the Galatian believers to "cast out" the Sinai covenant of bondage.

However, in verse 24 Paul says there are "two covenants".
What is this other covenant, if it is not the Sinai covenant?

It has to be the New Covenant Paul described in 2 Corinthians 3:6 and found in Hebrews 12:22-24.
　

NEW Covenant quoted in full in Hebrews 8:6-10 is a quote of Jeremiah 31:31-33 -- as we ALL know.

And in that text in Jeremiah we see that the LAW of God is "written on the heart and mind" under the NEW Covenant. Not "some LAW that Jeremiah and his readers knew nothing about"

=================================================

The term "under the LAW" in Gal 4 -- in its most favorable light - means under the obligation of the ceremonial law apart from faith. But in general Paul uses the term with respect to condemnation under the moral of God without the Gospel benefit of salvation.

The end of Galatians 4 is not about condemning the Word of God in the OT - it is the use of an allegory to demonstrate that the LAW of God is not a second-gospel a competing-gospel and never was. Period.

Gal 4
21 Tell me, you who want to be under law, do you not listen to the law?

<Paul is not saying "tell me you want want to affirm scripture - the Word of God -- how dare you not condemn scripture" > Rather Paul is addressing those who want to use the Law as a gospel.

Gal 4
22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the bondwoman and one by the free woman. 23 But the son by the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and the son by the free woman through the promise. 24 This is allegorically speaking, for these women are two covenants: one proceeding from Mount Sinai bearing children who are to be slaves; she is Hagar. 25 Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. 26 But the Jerusalem above is free; she is our mother. 27 For it is written,

“Rejoice, barren woman who does not bear;
Break forth and shout, you who are not in labor;
For more numerous are the children of the desolate
Than of the one who has a husband.”

NOTE: "Jerusalem above" was there in both OT and NT times. This is not a condemnation of the OT text of scripture. In fact it is in the OT that we find the NEW Covenant "I will write My LAWS on their heart and mind" Jer 31:31-33 - what is more "for it is written" is a reference to the still-authoritative OT text - as scripture.

Gal 4
28 And you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29 But as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now also. 30 But what does the Scripture say?

“Cast out the bondwoman and her son,
For the son of the bondwoman shall not be an heir with the son of the free woman.”

31 So then, brethren, we are not children of a bondwoman, but of the free woman.

NOTE: "Him who is born of the Spirit" is the same pre-cross teaching we see from Christ in John 3 - speaking to Nicodemus. Far from being a condemnation of pre-cross teaching - it affirms it.


================================
Rom 9
30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone.

1 John 3:4 - "SIN IS transgression of the LAW" both in OT and also by NT standards

So then in Rom 6 Paul speaks about the obligation not to SIN - even though not "under the law" -- not under the condemnation of the LAW.

Rom 6
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! 16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered

1 john 2:1 "these things I write to you that you sin NOT"

The Covenant at Sinai with Israel included
"Love your neighbor as yourself" Lev 19:18

And 40 years later Moses reminds them --
"Love God with all your heart" Deut 6:5

Christ continues to affirm them in Matt 22 , pre-cross - the Law of Moses upheld.

So then why is Paul associating Sinai with the old covenant in Gal 4?

Because the ceremonial law is no longer in effect.

1 Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" as compared to the ceremonial laws such as circumcision - as we see in this example from 1Cor 7:19

notice how Christ upholds what "Moses said" in Mark 7 calling it "The WORD of GOD"

Mark 7

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

John 14:15 "IF you Love Me - KEEP My Commandments"

"Love ME and KEEP My Commandments" Ex 20:6 -- from the TEN Commandments.

No wonder NT authors affirm the TEN Commandments as part of the moral law of God for the saints even in the NT as we see here
14 minutes ago #1


Heb 8:6-10 Christ's New Covenant and His TEN Commandments at Sinai
6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.

A New Covenant
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second. 8 For finding fault with them, He says,

“Behold, days are coming, says the Lord,
When I will effect a New Covenant
With the house of Israel and with the house of Judah;
9 Not like the covenant which I made with their fathers
On the day when I took them by the hand
To lead them out of the land of Egypt;
For they did not continue in My covenant,
And I did not care for them, says the Lord.
10 “For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
After those days, says the Lord:
I will put My laws into their minds,
And I will write them on their hearts.
And I will be their God,
And they shall be My people.

 

[BobRyan]

Christ gave two commandments, which are repeated in 1st John.

More Bible - less speculation please.

Matt 19
16 And someone came to Him and said, “Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life?” 17 And He said to him, “Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” 18 Then he *said to Him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said,
“You shall not commit murder;
You shall not commit adultery;
You shall not steal;
You shall not bear false witness;
19 Honor your father and mother; and
You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

That is more than two and we have not even gotten to "Love God with all your heart" and "Do not take God's name in vain"