Liminal Bridges

[Sum1sGruj]

We all have our ideas of what the path to God is. But are we correct?

One thing that I have noticed among Christians is a sort of split- some believe that the Old Covenant has been replaced, and that we do not need to follow it. Others believe that it still stands to certain degrees (some more, some less).

If I put in percentages of all the people I have ever spoken to on the matter, it would roughly be something like this:

Limited OC: 30%
Anti-OC: 70%

One would think that Jesus was very clear. In fact, that is one of the great things about Jesus., he explained things extremely well. He was a complete walk-through to what it is to be a child of God. His testimony and his witnesses have thoroughly reached out to us in Scripture.

So what is this gap? We have all these denominations, and each one has a differing interpretation, but there is one thing that we should all be sharing- and that is the basic principles of Christianity.

Now, I believe that the OC was not replaced, and that we have an obligation to heed what it dictates as sin.
However, Jesus did in fact smooth out certain things with certain laws, and he payed for our sins, which among other things means we do not have to sacrifice or face Earthly punishment.
To me, it’s all about contrasting, as he never put away the law., he completed it.

Anyways, that is just my belief. I feel that there is not much to indicate anything different. But at the same time, that is just my interpretation and I would like to start a discussion on it for all who wish to do so. I have a funny feeling I am not the only one that sometimes has this on their mind, and that makes it all the more worthwhile.

I will say, however, that biblical one-liners just do not cut it for either side. Just judging from the complexity of Scripture, that is. There is a certain amount of depth and deep thought that is required in general. The Bible is the book of answers, but sometimes it doesn't portray them as plain and blunt as we would like.

 

[Jase]

We all have our ideas of what the path to God is. But are we correct?

One thing that I have noticed among Christians is a sort of split- some believe that the Old Covenant has been replaced, and that we do not need to follow it. Others believe that it still stands to certain degrees (some more, some less).

If I put in percentages of all the people I have ever spoken to on the matter, it would roughly be something like this:

Limited OC: 30%
Anti-OC: 70%

One would think that Jesus was very clear. In fact, that is one of the great things about Jesus., he explained things extremely well. He was a complete walk-through to what it is to be a child of God. His testimony and his witnesses have thoroughly reached out to us in Scripture.

So what is this gap? We have all these denominations, and each one has a differing interpretation, but there is one thing that we should all be sharing- and that is the basic principles of Christianity.

Now, I believe that the OC was not replaced, and that we have an obligation to heed what it dictates as sin.
However, Jesus did in fact smooth out certain things with certain laws, and he payed for our sins, which among other things means we do not have to sacrifice or face Earthly punishment.
To me, it’s all about contrasting, as he never put away the law., he completed it.

Anyways, that is just my belief. I feel that there is not much to indicate anything different. But at the same time, that is just my interpretation and I would like to start a discussion on it for all who wish to do so. I have a funny feeling I am not the only one that sometimes has this on their mind, and that makes it all the more worthwhile.

I will say, however, that biblical one-liners just do not cut it for either side. Just judging from the complexity of Scripture, that is. There is a certain amount of depth and deep thought that is required in general. The Bible is the book of answers, but sometimes it doesn't portray them as plain and blunt as we would like.

And how do you choose which of the 613 Mitzvot apply to you and which do not? You're not a Jew/Israelite, so why would you think all those laws are relevant? Many, if not most of the Torah commandments were written specifically to set apart the Israelites from their surrounding cultures, so they had their own identity. Many of the laws are downright barbaric and completely immoral from a 21st Century standpoint (stoning disobedient children as an example).

So how are we to look at a set of laws that 1)No one can follow and 2) Not all of them should be followed?

 

[LoraElise]

So how are we to look at a set of laws that 1)No one can follow and 2) Not all of them should be followed?

Paul said specifically that we are no longer under the tutor of the Law. I believe him.

 

[LoraElise]

To follow the OC Law at all is to crucify Christ anew. That was why He said that love, for God and for one's neighbor, is the only Law the believer has.

 

[Sum1sGruj]

And how do you choose which of the 613 Mitzvot apply to you and which do not? You're not a Jew/Israelite, so why would you think all those laws are relevant? Many, if not most of the Torah commandments were written specifically to set apart the Israelites from their surrounding cultures, so they had their own identity. Many of the laws are downright barbaric and completely immoral from a 21st Century standpoint (stoning disobedient children as an example).

So how are we to look at a set of laws that 1)No one can follow and 2) Not all of them should be followed?

Deuteronomy 4:5-8
See, I have taught you decrees and laws as the LORD my God commanded me, so that you may follow them in the land you are entering to take possession of it. Observe them carefully, for this will show your wisdom and understanding to the nations, who will hear about all these decrees and say, “Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.” What other nation is so great as to have their gods near them the way the LORD our God is near us whenever we pray to him?And what other nation is so great as to have such righteous decrees and laws as this body of laws I am setting before you today?

What we gather from this is that when a nation becomes taken by Jewish belief, they adhere to the law. They are an example to all nations what it is to be followers of God.
Romans 2:11 states that there is no partiality with God. Therefore, if one follows the Abrahamic God, one is subject to it's laws. Further on, Romans 3:29 goes to state that he is God of not only Jews, but Gentiles as well.

See, it's unanimous as far as the Bible is concerned that Jews were chosen to be a holy nation, not to be the only holy nation. It doesn't even make sense, really, to think that only Jews are subject to such.

This is where the contrasting comes in. Obviously, Jesus never did away with the OC, he completed it. It's very important to realize what is meant by that. Does completing mean to destroy or replace?
It doesn't.
The disciplinary aspects of the OC have been undone through the blood of Christ. We do not need to sacrifice or face Earthly punishment.

Paul goes on to explain this in detail in Galatians. The law is not nullified, but Jesus is our promise to be children of God, and the law does not fulfill a promise alone without discipline for our sins. Jesus replaced the aspects of punishment and sacrifice with himself.

And that is why I started this thread. It seems like some Christians simply try to rub off the OC in any way they can, and it doesn't make sense to me because the NT speaks on this as well:

Corinthians 10:5
We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

So where is this idea that the OC is just null and void? And what wisdom is there, as spoken in the Deuteronomy verses I posted, that constitutes us as a holy nation? It seems like if these things are just so replaceable, then Jesus wasn't needed in the first place.

 

[LoraElise]

It seems like if these things are just so replaceable, then Jesus wasn't needed in the first place.

Actually, I think it's the other way around. If the OC Law had carried/carries any salvific weight, then Jesus wasn't needed in the first place.

The Law never saved anyone. It was meant only to point people toward Christ, to show them their wretchedness and need of a Saviour. If you want to say it is a nice guideline for pleasing God, with the proviso that much of it was meant only for Israel of the time (animal sacrifice, etc), that's one thing. But obedience to it (or non-obedience) cannot be turned to as proof of a person's salvation or lack thereof, nor can it be used as a measure of a believer's walk with the Lord.

To break any tiny part of the Law was to break the whole Law. Either you keep it all (which is impossible), or none of it merits you a thing.

 

[LoraElise]

See, it's unanimous as far as the Bible is concerned that Jews were chosen to be a holy nation, not to be the only holy nation. It doesn't even make sense, really, to think that only Jews are subject to such.

Deuteronomy 14:2: "For you are a holy people to the Lord your God, and the Lord has chosen you to be a people for His own possession out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth."

That seems pretty clear. Israel was the only chosen people, the only holy nation.

Christian believers today share in the blessing of Abraham (Galatians 3:9-14), but those blessings are still exclusive.

 

[Sum1sGruj]

Deuteronomy 14:2: "For you are a holy people to the Lord your God, and the Lord has chosen you to be a people for His own possession out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth."

That seems pretty clear. Israel was the only chosen people, the only holy nation.

Christian believers today share in the blessing of Abraham (Galatians 3:9-14), but those blessings are still exclusive.

They were chosen to be the initiators. Nothing came to us that wasn't through them.
The NT does not indicate that the OC is replaced. People simply misread what Paul says about it. He does not go on to dismiss such things in the OC as no longer being sins. He states that the law is the yoke of slavery, meaning we were bound to the curse of sin and had to face each and every one dead on with harsh exaction.
See, Jesus saved us from that. He did not say that such things are no longer sinful.

That is just a plain as day truth. There is no working around that. A good example would be the what I have quoted from your post. You are basing the entire aspect of what it is to be Christian on a simple line that does not concur with the rest of biblical intrigue in the slightest.
If the law is only for Jews, then Christ is only for Jews. They both go together, it's really just that simple.

 

[LoraElise]

They were chosen to be the initiators.

It doesn't say that. It says they were the only chosen people on the planet.

The NT does not indicate that the OC is replaced. People simply misread what Paul says about it.

Paul said we are no longer under the tutor of the Law. There is no way to misread that. Either you follow the Law, or you follow Christ. We are to obey in the Spirit, not in the Letter. The difference is profound.

He does not go on to dismiss such things in the OC as no longer being sins. He states that the law is the yoke of slavery, meaning we were bound to the curse of sin and had to face each and every one dead on with harsh exaction.

And Christ said that, by contrast, his yoke is light. We are to take up His, not that of the Law.

See, Jesus saved us from that. He did not say that such things are no longer sinful.

Clearly, such things as wearing mixed fabrics, planting multiple crops in the same field and failing to put a railing around the roof of your house applied only to ancient Israel under the Law, but have no place for anyone else and are not sins. The same applies to the wearing of clothing of the opposite sex, which was aimed specifically at the practice of pagan idol worship (of which it apparently was a part). Murder, coveting, stealing, hating your neighbor -- all these things, of course, displease God. But no part of the Law has any bearing whatsoever on our salvation, for ALL sins were nailed to the Cross, and to give them any further weight is to suggest that Christ's sacrifice was insufficient.

That is just a plain as day truth. There is no working around that.

You have a God Box.

You are basing the entire aspect of what it is to be Christian on a simple line that does not concur with the rest of biblical intrigue in the slightest.

No, I'm not. The fulfillment of the Law at the Cross is crucial to our salvation. Fulfillment means completion, and as far as salvation goes, the Law is no longer relevant. Christ is our once-and-for-all sacrifice.

If you want to live under the law, go ahead. But be aware that, if you do so with the intent of in any way earning anything, you are telling Christ that what He did for you wasn't enough. Bind yourself to any of it, and you are bound to keep it all. Every word. Good luck.

If the law is only for Jews, then Christ is only for Jews. They both go together, it's really just that simple.

Untrue. We are told specifically that our Christian faith -- Jew or gentile, male or female, slave or free -- makes us partakers of the promises God made to Abraham.

I appreciate your faith in Christ and adore your diligence in seeking Him. But please do not put the cart before the horse -- our faith saves us, and the new law written on our hearts is the only one that matters.

 

[Sum1sGruj]

It doesn't say that. It says they were the only chosen people on the planet.

Matthew 5:18
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.

If Jesus meant that the OC is altogether obsolete, surely there be no need for this verse.

Paul said we are no longer under the tutor of the Law. There is no way to misread that. Either you follow the Law, or you follow Christ. We are to obey in the Spirit, not in the Letter. The difference is profound.

And he also says the law is still there. We are just not enslaved to it's discipline. I'm telling you, unless there are other things in the Bible that say the OC is obsolete, it is still in effect.
What people are doing is taking what is actually an affirmation of the OC and turning it against it.

And Christ said that, by contrast, his yoke is light. We are to take up His, not that of the Law.

Yes, in which we atone through him, not through stones and animals. Exaction requires a sin to exact a sin. It's a curse. When you use God's name in vain, you were stoned to death, which is a sin in itself as well as atonement.
Saying that the OC is obsolete is a clear misunderstanding of what sin is about.

But no part of the Law has any bearing whatsoever on our salvation, for ALL sins were nailed to the Cross, and to give them any further weight is to suggest that Christ's sacrifice was insufficient.

That's not really true in it's entire context. Some people make it too much more then what it is. Jesus saved us from the curse of sin and gave us a broader road in which to reach Heaven.
He did not give us the freedom to do as we please. If he destroyed the OC, he would have said so. Did he? No, he completed it.

This whole idea of the OC being obsolete is a complete fabrication. All it is, is just adjusting interpretation to whatever fits the day and age. In which case, has now gone completely over the rails.

 

[LoraElise]

Matthew 5:18
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.

If Jesus meant that the OC is altogether obsolete, surely there be no need for this verse.

And everything was accomplished at the Cross.

This whole idea of the OC being obsolete is a complete fabrication. All it is, is just adjusting interpretation to whatever fits the day and age. In which case, has now gone completely over the rails.

Enjoy obeying your Law. Enjoy thinking God is impressed by the sweat of your brow. People have crawled across broken glass, or refrained from speaking for the rest of their lives, or starved themselves to death, thinking He would give them heavenly brownie points for their efforts.

It doesn't work that way.

 

[Sum1sGruj]

And everything was accomplished at the Cross.

No, no, no. See, he had succeeded in saving us. His suffering was over. That's actually a pretty weak argument that I have heard several times before. It's not even sensible.

The Earth and Heavens are still here. It doesn't even fit the context anyways.

Enjoy obeying your Law. Enjoy thinking God is impressed by the sweat of your brow. People have crawled across broken glass, or refrained from speaking for the rest of their lives, or starved themselves to death, thinking He would give them heavenly brownie points for their efforts.

It doesn't work that way.

For one, how would you know? You do not seem to understand the sanctity of Christ. Or maybe you do, and you just hope it isn't.

Jesus states that one will be called more/lesser in Heaven for certain things. Sell your possessions, walk the Earth, devote your life entirely to Christ in the purest way., show your unfathomed faith, etc. etc. these things impress God. What doesn't impress God is using Jesus hoping to get a free ticket into Paradise because you can't seem to get over blatant sinning.

 

[LoraElise]

No, no, no. See, he had succeeded in saving us. His suffering was over. That's actually a pretty weak argument that I have heard several times before. It's not even sensible.

The whole point of the Law was to point to Christ, whose coming and sacrifice secured our salvation in Him. When, as He died upon the Cross, He said, "it is finished," He meant it. Our salvation was secured. The Law had achieved its purpose, and so had He.

Jesus states that one will be called more/lesser in Heaven for certain things...these things impress God.

Rewards will be given. Crowns. They are manifestations of God's love for us, just as our earthly works display our love for Him. These works have no bearing on salvation -- only our faith in Him does. God's standard is perfection. What we consider righteousness 'is as filthy rags to Him.' He is not impressed by anything we do. Works do not bring salvation -- they are a result of it.

What doesn't impress God is using Jesus hoping to get a free ticket into Paradise because you can't seem to get over blatant sinning.

Clearly, you believe in salvation by works, that it is the things you do that will tip the balance and get one into Heaven. But we are justified by faith alone -- sola fide -- and that is why Christ had to lay down His life for us. God's standard is absolute perfection, and we cannot meet that. Christ does, and we are wrapped in His perfection. Christians are not judged, for our sins already have been paid for -- 'Whoever believes in Him is not condemned.' Romans says that the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable. We cannot lose them.

I do not do good works in order to try to impress God or to earn salvation or rewards. I do them because I love Him, and because I am humbly and deeply grateful He saw fit to save a wretched soul like me.

I do not want to get into a 'salvation by works vs. salvation by faith alone' debate. Believe what you want.

 

[Sum1sGruj]

The whole point of the Law was to point to Christ, whose coming and sacrifice secured our salvation in Him. When, as He died upon the Cross, He said, "it is finished," He meant it. Our salvation was secured. The Law had achieved its purpose, and so had He.

The whole point of the Law is to provide what and what isn't right. When you do not follow the important OC laws, you are missing the mark, contributing to sinful nature, and so on.
You sin when you do not follow them. Just because Jesus died for your sins does not mean you are not a sinner, and since we're already 'barely there' in this day and age, it isn't good to endorse something that is not true.

If Jesus wanted to convey a message that law was to be done at some point in time, he would have said so. It is afterall something extremely important. Do you not understand the extremity you are proposing?

Nothing in the NT indicates it, no priest, preacher, POPE, etc. will ever tell you to ignore the OC altogether.

You are trying to convey something that doesn't exist. The reason why Christ is primary is because any act of atonement requires that one sin again. That is why it was the yoke of slavery- to sin. Are you starting to see some connections?

 

[LoraElise]

You are trying to convey something that doesn't exist. The reason why Christ is primary is because any act of atonement requires that one sin again. That is why it was the yoke of slavery- to sin. Are you starting to see some connections?

K, I'm done.

You said in your opening post that your assertion was just your interpretation of things and that you wanted to discuss it. I discussed it. The theology I stated does exist was not my invention -- it is the doctrine of sola fide, is strictly Biblical and was established long ago by believers and theologians far wiser than me. Look it up.

Believe as you wish, and as your heart and the Spirit lead you. I will do the same.

 

[Sum1sGruj]

K, I'm done.

You said in your opening post that your assertion was just your interpretation of things and that you wanted to discuss it. I discussed it. The theology I stated does exist was not my invention -- it is the doctrine of sola fide, is strictly Biblical and was established long ago by believers and theologians far wiser than me. Look it up.

Believe as you wish, and as your heart and the Spirit lead you. I will do the same.

And what faith does a person have who is willingly neck deep in sin?

One actually has to have faith to be saved, and Jesus said he is not to be used.

So really, sola fide makes no real difference to the OC still standing. All it does is issue a certain leniency, which I actually believe is true. But still., faith- one who willingly sins according to what the Bible dictates as sin is a lack of such.

 

[jennimatts]

Matthew 5:18
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.

If Jesus meant that the OC is altogether obsolete, surely there be no need for this verse.

And he also says the law is still there. We are just not enslaved to it's discipline. I'm telling you, unless there are other things in the Bible that say the OC is obsolete, it is still in effect.

And everything was accomplished at the Cross.

No, no, no. See, he had succeeded in saving us.

How could he have succeeded in saving us if the law had not been fulfilled in it's entirety?

Proposing that we must yet fulfill the law would require changing Jesus words from "It is finished", to "I've done my part, the rest is up to you".

If you check Matthew 5:17 and 18, there is an interesting correlation.

Matthew 5:17-18 (NKJV)
Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.

Jesus came to fulfill the law. Until he had finished this, the law would not pass away.

If the law had not been fulfilled in it's entirety, the fact would remain that none of us could measure up to God's righteous perfection, and none of us could be saved. As Lora said, "we are justified by faith alone." It simply cannot be any other way.

 

[jennimatts]

Even the scribes and Pharisees, who were meticulous in keeping the smallest detail of the law, could not fulfill it. Perhaps that is because their keeping the law was merely an outward act, and God looks on the heart. Through their actions they kept the law, but in their heart, they didn't want to.

Matthew 5:20 (NKJV)
For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

John 5:24 (NKJV)
Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.

It does not say "... believes in Him who sent Me and keeps the law has everlasting life...".

 

[jennimatts]

I do not do good works in order to try to impress God or to earn salvation or rewards. I do them because I love Him, and because I am humbly and deeply grateful He saw fit to save a wretched soul like me.

AMEN!

Precisely the opposite of the scribes and Pharisees. Their works were for the sake of appearances and honor from men, but it did not affect their heart.

I would say we first believe and have faith in our heart, and after having received the loving gift of Gods salvation we desire to serve God and live for his glory. But we are never again bound to the law, for it is powerless to condemn us.

 

[jennimatts]

This whole idea of the OC being obsolete is a complete fabrication. All it is, is just adjusting interpretation to whatever fits the day and age.

It's not obsolete if you understand it's purpose is to point to Jesus.

In John 5, Jesus is offers a scathing indictment of the Jewish leaders, the same ones who meticulously kept the smallest details of the law. Jesus tells them that trusting in the law is misguided because the law does not give life, rather the law is meant only to point to the one true source of life, Jesus. He reveals that they don't have God's love in their hearts. They are more concerned about their prestige among men. They put their hope in Moses, but will be condemned by Moses, because they refuse to believe the law of Moses points to Jesus.

John 5:39-47
New Living Translation (NLT)
You search the Scriptures because you think they give you eternal life. But the Scriptures point to me! Yet you refuse to come to me to receive this life.
Your approval means nothing to me, because I know you don’t have God’s love within you. For I have come to you in my Father’s name, and you have rejected me. Yet if others come in their own name, you gladly welcome them. No wonder you can’t believe! For you gladly honor each other, but you don’t care about the honor that comes from the one who alone is God.
Yet it isn’t I who will accuse you before the Father. Moses will accuse you! Yes, Moses, in whom you put your hopes. If you really believed Moses, you would believe me, because he wrote about me. But since you don’t believe what he wrote, how will you believe what I say?