God's Law = God's Character

[Cribstyl]

I agree.

The problem we sometimes encounter as we add human reasoning to the scriptures is that we sometimes impose a human presupposition on our conclusion.

For example, I might suppose that God is directly tied to His holy convocations and feast days, so much so that it is hard to distinguish between God and His feast days. To support my theory, I might provide a chart such as the following:

GOD=
Good Luke 18:19
Holy Ps. 99:5
Perfect Matt 5:48
Righteous Jer. 23:6
Love 1 John 4:7, 8
Spiritual 1 Cor. 10:4
A sacrificial offering John 3:17
Eternal Gen 21:33

ALL FEASTS/CONVOCATIONS =
Good Nahum 1:15 (“good news&#8221
Holy Lev. 23:2, 4, 37 (“holy convocations&#8221
Perfect Lev. 23:15 (“seven perfect Sabbaths&#8221
Righteous Deut. 4:8 (“righteous statutes & judgments according to all this law&#8221
Love Zech 8:19 (In celebrating the feast, “love truth and peace.&#8221
Spiritual Lev. 23:8 (a “sacred assembly&#8221
A sacrificial offering Lev. 23:12 (“sacrifice as a burnt offering to the LORD a lamb&#8221
Eternal Lev. 23:14 (an “everlasting ordinance&#8221
​

What I've offered is a silly example of the prooftext method which ties a number of unrelated texts together, passages that were written by different authors in different languages to different audiences during different time periods. In my opinion, this method does not usually lead to sound conclusions. Scripture does not tell us that God's character is directly tied to the law.

BFA

But, if you take away their reasoning they'll have no doctrines.

This post debunked the OP's folly

 

[LoveofTruth]

There has been alot of reference to God's Law (decalogue) being only applicable to the OT. That somehow, Jesus' ministry and death brought in a 'newer, better covenant'.

If we can understand the Law of God is directly tied to His character, then we realize that it is unchangeable and was indeed in place at creation, even before that... as God was eternal, His Law is eternal.

I know that my commentary will not hold any weight in this arguement so I will post scripture to show the relationship... sorry for the formatting, it was supposed to be in a table to better show the relationship but it wouldn't paste over.

God Is...

Good Luke 18:19
Holy Psa 99:5
Perfect Matt 5:48
Pure 1 John 3:3
Just Deut. 32:4
True John 3:32
Spiritual 1 Corin. 10:4
Righteous Jer 23:6
Faithful 1 Corin. 1:9
Love 1 John 4:7, 8
Unchangeable James 1:17
Eternal Gen 21:33

The Law Is...
Good 1 Tim 1:8
Holy Rom 7:12
Perfect Psa 119:7
Pure Psa 19:8
Just Rom 7:12
True Psa 19:9
Spiritual Rom 7:14
Righteous Psa 119:172
Faithful Psa 119:86
Love Rom 13:10
Unchangeable Matt 5:18
Eternal Psa 111:7, 8

The ten commandments are done away in their ministration and they were a ministration of death and condemnation. I speak of the tables of stone given to moses and the whole Old Covenant as Paul clearly says. The law is not of faith.

All those who are struggling with the law and who are still under it should read this and Galatians 3-5 etc.

"7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: 8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? 9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. 10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. 11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious. 12 Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: 13 And not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: 14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. 15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

The ten commandments are done away in their ministration and they were a ministration of death and condemnation. I speak of the tables of stone given to moses and the whole Old Covenant as Paul clearly says. The law is not of faith.

All those who are struggling with the law and who are still under it should read this and Galatians 3-5 etc.

"7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: 8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? 9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. 10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. 11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious. 12 Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: 13 And not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: 14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. 15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.

Care to show in the 24 scriptures I posted where the Decalogue does not perfectly reflect the Fathers character? You can't because that understanding stands on it's own.. regardless of what you or I think. Truth does not need confirmation by anyone to be truth... the Word is truth. Precept upon precept, here a little and there a little.

Your eisegesis of one verse does not trump the exegesis of 24... interpretation is not about trying to explain the meaning of one verse to your own understanding but to take the totality of scripture on a subject and let the Bible show the meaning... this is true doctrine free of mans opinion.

Case in point, I can show from scripture that the ministration of death is the hallmark of the Law in either dispensation. The Commandments on stone (the letter) showed what was sin in the OT and the Commandments on the heart shows what is sin in the new... same Commandments but what's different is our relationship to it. Although there were those in the OT that did understand it as Jesus taught...David for example LOVED the Law because it reproved to righteousness. I love the Law because it causes the sanctification to righteousness. The Holy Spirit is the defining factor that makes the difference.

 

[LoveofTruth]

Care to show in the 24 scriptures I posted where the Decalogue does not perfectly reflect the Fathers character? You can't because that understanding stands on it's own.. regardless of what you or I think. Truth does not need confirmation by anyone to be truth... the Word is truth. Precept upon precept, here a little and there a little.

Your eisegesis of one verse does not trump the exegesis of 24... interpretation is not about trying to explain the meaning of one verse to your own understanding but to take the totality of scripture on a subject and let the Bible show the meaning... this is true doctrine free of mans opinion.

Case in point, I can show from scripture that the ministration of death is the hallmark of the Law in either dispensation. The Commandments on stone (the letter) showed what was sin in the OT and the Commandments on the heart shows what is sin in the new... same Commandments but what's different is our relationship to it. Although there were those in the OT that did understand it as Jesus taught...David for example LOVED the Law because it reproved to righteousness. I love the Law because it causes the sanctification to righteousness. The Holy Spirit is the defining factor that makes the difference.

Strangely enough, I have found recently when dealing with heretics and cults downtown, that when I show a clear section of scripture and many verses. They will simply ignore the verses and quote ther own, creating a apparent contradiction in their doctrine, and they do not harmonize all the text. I seek to harmonize all the text, but the cults don't. They select a few text that appeal to their doctrine and avoid the others that clearly rebuke them.

When you say

"Your eisegesis of one verse does not trump the exegesis of 24"

I have about 48 verses I could show and all the verses i show can be harmonized with the verses you show and the context and meaning defined.

This is not a right way to study scripture.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

sStrangely enough, I have found recently when dealing with heretics and cults downtown, that when I show a clear section of scripture and many verses. They will simply ignore the verses and quote ther own, creating a apparent contradiction in their doctrine, and they do not harmonize all the text. I seek to harmonize all the text, but the cults don't. They select a few text that appeal to their doctrine and avoid the others that clearly rebuke them.

So you're comparing me with someone that only quotes one verse to your many, when the record shows I have shown the weight of scriptural evidence to your one verse... OOOOKKKAYYYYY.

"Your eisegesis of one verse does not trump the exegesis of 24"

I have about 48 verses I could show and all the verses i show can be harmonized with the verses you sow and the context and meaning defined.

This is not a right way to study scripture.

So guessing your understanding is? Please for the sake of verity, post up those 48 verses...

 

[LoveofTruth]

So you're comparing me with someone that only quotes one verse to your many, when the record shows I have shown the weight of scriptural evidence to your one verse... OOOOKKKAYYYYY.


So guessing your understanding is? Please for the sake of verity, post up those 48 verses...

Im not saying your one verse to my many. Im saying when I post a verse that rebukes some they post another verse that they thing s is a contradiction to the verse i post. They do not harmonize the verses as i do they leave the parent contradiction and cling to their verse instead of the verse I quote and theirs and harmonizing them.

 

[LoveofTruth]

So guessing your understanding is? Please for the sake of verity, post up those 48 verses...

I can show 48 verses if we define the issue clearly. Are you saying believers today are still under the law? and need to keep the law? And the Sabbath law as well?

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

I can show 48 verses if we define the issue clearly. Are you saying believers today are still under the law? and need to keep the law? And the Sabbath law as well?

Are you permitted as a NT Christian to kill? What about commit adultery? Steal perhaps? Do you regularly worship worldly idols with impunity? Do you keep the Law? Be honest, of course you do..all except the 4th.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

I can show 48 verses if we define the issue clearly. Are you saying believers today are still under the law? and need to keep the law? And the Sabbath law as well?

My original statement of 24 verses was that the Commandments reflect the character of the Father... there's the context, please provide scripture refuting it. If you can't, then show scripture that God changed His character.

 

[LoveofTruth]

Are you permitted as a NT Christian to kill? What about commit adultery? Steal perhaps? Do you regularly worship worldly idols with impunity? Do you keep the Law? Be honest, of course you do..all except the 4th.

a simple story might help here

Four young men are walking down a street. They see a large glass house with a sign on it. It says' Don't throw rocks at the house and break the glass, you must love me." The four boys are provoked by the sign and mock and throw stones and walk away laughing.

Now all four young men get saved. They are walking down the street and see the glass house with the sign and the broken window. They go over to the man and say sorry and help clean it up and repair the damage. The man now can take the sign down for them, because they don't need to be told you must love me don't break the window by throwing rocks.

They don't need the sign as long as they walk in love.

The sign was basically showing that they were not in that love and it exposed their lack of love.The sign didn't have any power to stop them from throwing stones.

 

[LoveofTruth]

My original statement of 24 verses was that the Commandments reflect the character of the Father... there's the context, please provide scripture refuting it. If you can't, then show scripture that God changed His character.

are you saying that no man can know God and His character outside of the Mosaic law?

 

[Dave-W]

The ten commandments are done away in their ministration and they were a ministration of death and condemnation. I speak of the tables of stone given to moses and the whole Old Covenant as Paul clearly says. The law is not of faith.

I would submit that you have an entirely erroneous understanding of the issue. So does almost all of Catholicism and Protestantism.

 

[Dave-W]

Now all four young men get saved. They are walking down the street and see the glass house with the sign and the broken window. They go over to the man and say sorry and help clean it up and repair the damage. The man now can take the sign down for them, because they don't need to be told you must love me don't break the window by throwing rocks.

They don't need the sign as long as they walk in love.

Correct. BUT - the man STILL does not want them to throw stones. The motivation may be different, but the prohibition remains.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

a simple story might help here

A simple yes or no answer was all that was needed... are you a law keeper because you don't kill, steal, covet, have idols, respect parents? Yes, you are, the same as you are law abiding by not breaking our countries civil and criminal laws.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

are you saying that no man can know God and His character outside of the Mosaic law?

Outside of the Royal law written with God's own finger? No...

Now, are you going to provide those verses of scripture disproving the Royal law is God's very character?

 

[Gary K]

ECR,

There is an old book written by FC Gilbert around the turn of the 20th century that gives a list of 38 attributes held in common by God and His law. In all it lists 76 texts showing the oneness between God and His law. You can download the book from the White Estate or from AdventPioneerbooks.com. The title is Practical Lessons from the Experience of Isreal. It is available as a pdf file from both sources. The list is in chapter 11 section 23.

The book is an excellent read as it opens up our understanding of the NT by giving the background to the controversies between the Pharisees and Jesus, and the hold that the rabbis had over the common Jewish man on the street. Gilbert was a Jew, and raised to become a Rabbi in an Orthodox Jewish family. He became an SDA in his twenties and was ordained as an SDA minister. His life story is also very good. It's available as an epub download, although I can't remember for sure where I downloaded it from. Just search for the title: From Judaism to Christianity and Gospel Work Among the Hebrews.

 

[Dave-W]

ECR,

There is an old book written by FC Gilbert around the turn of the 20th century that gives a list of 38 attributes held in common by God and His law. In all it lists 76 texts showing the oneness between God and His law. You can download the book from the White Estate or from AdventPioneerbooks.com. The title is Practical Lessons from the Experience of Isreal. It is available as a pdf file from both sources. The list is in chapter 11 section 23.

The book is an excellent read as it opens up our understanding of the NT by giving the background to the controversies between the Pharisees and Jesus, and the hold that the rabbis had over the common Jewish man on the street. Gilbert was a Jew, and raised to become a Rabbi in an Orthodox Jewish family. He became an SDA in his twenties and was ordained as an SDA minister. His life story is also very good. It's available as an epub download, although I can't remember for sure where I downloaded it from. Just search for the title: From Judaism to Christianity and Gospel Work Among the Hebrews.

That sounds like an interesting book. I will have to look it up.

Thanks!

 

[Gary K]

That sounds like an interesting book. I will have to look it up.

Thanks!

You're welcome. I think you will find both books to be very interesting. I know Gilbert's books, he wrote several of them, have opened my understanding of the Bible quite a bit. I think they are pretty important books and that everyone should read them as they expose a lot of the errors floating around Christendom these days.

 

[Dave-W]

You're welcome. I think you will find both books to be very interesting. I know Gilbert's books, he wrote several of them, have opened my understanding of the Bible quite a bit. I think they are pretty important books and that everyone should read them as they expose a lot of the errors floating around Christendom these days.

I looked at a pdf of the one Practical Lessons and was rather disappointed. Either he forgot a lot or they did not teach that much to their rabbinic students a century ago. There were several things he got wrong, including the part where Hillel was the more harsh legalist compared to Shammai. (it was the other way around)

 

[Soyeong]

There has been alot of reference to God's Law (decalogue) being only applicable to the OT. That somehow, Jesus' ministry and death brought in a 'newer, better covenant'.

If we can understand the Law of God is directly tied to His character, then we realize that it is unchangeable and was indeed in place at creation, even before that... as God was eternal, His Law is eternal.

I know that my commentary will not hold any weight in this arguement so I will post scripture to show the relationship... sorry for the formatting, it was supposed to be in a table to better show the relationship but it wouldn't paste over.

God Is...

Good Luke 18:19
Holy Psa 99:5
Perfect Matt 5:48
Pure 1 John 3:3
Just Deut. 32:4
True John 3:32
Spiritual 1 Corin. 10:4
Righteous Jer 23:6
Faithful 1 Corin. 1:9
Love 1 John 4:7, 8
Unchangeable James 1:17
Eternal Gen 21:33

The Law Is...
Good 1 Tim 1:8
Holy Rom 7:12
Perfect Psa 119:7
Pure Psa 19:8
Just Rom 7:12
True Psa 19:9
Spiritual Rom 7:14
Righteous Psa 119:172
Faithful Psa 119:86
Love Rom 13:10
Unchangeable Matt 5:18
Eternal Psa 111:7, 8

Spot on, with the exception that God's Law consists of more than just the decalogue. For example, in 1 Peter 1:13-16, we are told to have a holy conduct for God is holy, which a reference to Leviticus where God was giving instructions for how to have a holy conduct, such as Leviticus 11:44-45, where having a holy conduct for God is holy involves refraining from eating unclean animals. There are many verses that refer to the Mosaic Law as being God's instructions for how to walk in His ways, so all of His commands were given to teach us about Him and how to reflect His character.