Moralism failed me, so where is my righteousness?

[oikonomia]

Eze 36:26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
Eze 36:27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

Now this was an interesting verse indeed. God would cause His regenerated people to walk in His statutes and keep His judgments.

He does does not say "keep my ordinances" though.
The Apostle Paul says these were nailed to the cross and were contrary to us.

Wiping out the handwriting in ordinances, which was against us,
which was contrary to us; and He has taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross. (Col. 2:14)

Abolishing in His flesh the law of the commandments in ordinances, that He might create the two in Himself into one new man, so making peace, (Eph. 2:15)

But I think your examples are closer to us saying the same thing.
But to strive in the flesh to do the law is to be at enmity with God.
I welcome the emphasis on new birth, new life, abiding in Him as a living Person.

The revelation of this is unfolded when the Law given by Moses is replace and superceded with Grace which
came with Christ.

I will react to any flavor like the Judaizers wooing the sons of God back to highly revering law keeping in distraction to
Christ the life giving Spirit. This Paul said was like witchcraft. It was bewitching the churches.

 

[Gary K]

Now this was an interesting verse indeed. God would cause His regenerated people to walk in His statutes and keep His judgments.

He does does not say "keep my ordinances" though.
The Apostle Paul says these were nailed to the cross and were contrary to us.

Wiping out the handwriting in ordinances, which was against us,
which was contrary to us; and He has taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross. (Col. 2:14)

Abolishing in His flesh the law of the commandments in ordinances, that He might create the two in Himself into one new man, so making peace, (Eph. 2:15)

But I think your examples are closer to us saying the same thing.
But to strive in the flesh to do the law is to be at enmity with God.
I welcome the emphasis on new birth, new life, abiding in Him as a living Person.

The revelation of this is unfolded when the Law given by Moses is replace and superceded with Grace which
came with Christ.

I will react to any flavor like the Judaizers wooing the sons of God back to highly revering law keeping in distraction to
Christ the life giving Spirit. This Paul said was like witchcraft. It was bewitching the churches.

What do you think a statute is?

We are not to strive in the flesh. We are to allow the Spirit to change us.

 

[oikonomia]

What do you think a statute is?

We are not to strive in the flesh. We are to allow the Spirit to change us.

Statute

The Statute is (Chukkim) in Hebrew, which is the precepts or regulations for health care and hygiene. A statute is written law as laid down by the legislature; a statute is (legal) (common law) legislated rule of society which has been given the force of law by those it governs.

Ordinance

An ordinance may signify a decree, edict or rescript. The commandments, statutes, decrees, and requirements of God are properly defined as the ordinances of God.

Copied from What Are The Differences Between These Biblical Terms: Ordinance, Testimony, Law, Commandment, Precept and Statute? - Kingdom Dynamics

The relationship and possible overlap in some cases, I would like to study further.
According to this article a statute might be an ordinance.

The Holy Spirit is not leading us today to keep ordinances like:
burnt offering, meal offering, peace offering, sin offering,

The Holy Spirit is not leading us today to perform the judgments as laws that accompany these ordinances.

The Spirit is not leading the church to conduct ordinances related to the conscration of Aaron and his sons.
The lessons and regulations of the Levitucal priests. The Spirit is not empowering us to enact these things.
We may learn spiritual principles from these ordinances appropriate to the New Testament economy.

Nailed to the cross as ordinances contrary to us would include:
dietery laws, laws about contacting corpses, steps to enact concerning leprosy, such as cleansing of the leper and his house,
ordinances about discharges from the body,
details of the expiatory sacrifices,
details about how to handle the blood of sacrificed animals,
disqualifications to the Levitical priesthood,
acceptable and non-acceeptable ways to perform vows and freewill offerings.

I do not think the Holy Spirit is leading or empowering Christians to:
keep ordinances of weekly feasts, annual feasts, the Passover feast,
the feast of unleavened bread, the feast of firstfruits, the feast of Pentacost,
the feast of blowing of trumpets, the feast of expiation or the feast of tabernacles.

While I am willing to explore further the different / relationship of
laws, precepts, ordinances, statutes, judgments, testimonies (all words used about the Torah)
The Spirit changing man includes setting us free from what the NT says Christ took out of the way, nailing to the cross.

Wiping out the handwriting in ordinances, which was against us,
which was contrary to us; and He has taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross. (Col. 2:14)

Abolishing in His flesh the law of the commandments in ordinances, that He might create the two in Himself into one new man, so making peace, (Eph. 2:15)

 

[Gary K]

Statute

The Statute is (Chukkim) in Hebrew, which is the precepts or regulations for health care and hygiene. A statute is written law as laid down by the legislature; a statute is (legal) (common law) legislated rule of society which has been given the force of law by those it governs.

Ordinance

An ordinance may signify a decree, edict or rescript. The commandments, statutes, decrees, and requirements of God are properly defined as the ordinances of God.

Copied from What Are The Differences Between These Biblical Terms: Ordinance, Testimony, Law, Commandment, Precept and Statute? - Kingdom Dynamics

The relationship and possible overlap in some cases, I would like to study further.
According to this article a statute might be an ordinance.

The Holy Spirit is not leading us today to keep ordinances like:
burnt offering, meal offering, peace offering, sin offering,

The Holy Spirit is not leading us today to perform the judgments as laws that accompany these ordinances.

The Spirit is not leading the church to conduct ordinances related to the conscration of Aaron and his sons.
The lessons and regulations of the Levitucal priests. The Spirit is not empowering us to enact these things.
We may learn spiritual principles from these ordinances appropriate to the New Testament economy.

Nailed to the cross as ordinances contrary to us would include:
dietery laws, laws about contacting corpses, steps to enact concerning leprosy, such as cleansing of the leper and his house,
ordinances about discharges from the body,
details of the expiatory sacrifices,
details about how to handle the blood of sacrificed animals,
disqualifications to the Levitical priesthood,
acceptable and non-acceeptable ways to perform vows and freewill offerings.

I do not think the Holy Spirit is leading or empowering Christians to:
keep ordinances of weekly feasts, annual feasts, the Passover feast,
the feast of unleavened bread, the feast of firstfruits, the feast of Pentacost,
the feast of blowing of trumpets, the feast of expiation or the feast of tabernacles.

While I am willing to explore further the different / relationship of
laws, precepts, ordinances, statutes, judgments, testimonies (all words used about the Torah)
The Spirit changing man includes setting us free from what the NT says Christ took out of the way, nailing to the cross.

Wiping out the handwriting in ordinances, which was against us,
which was contrary to us; and He has taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross. (Col. 2:14)

Abolishing in His flesh the law of the commandments in ordinances, that He might create the two in Himself into one new man, so making peace, (Eph. 2:15)

The handwriting of ordinances. Do you think that includes those things written by the finfer of God in stone?

 

[oikonomia]

The handwriting of ordinances. Do you think that includes those things written by the finfer of God in stone?

It must include what was written by the finger of God in stone tablets.
The keeping of the Sabbath was one of the ten commandments written in stone.
"Thou shalt not covet" was also one of the stone engraved commandments Paul says was death to him.

What then shall we say? Is the law sin? Absolutely not! But I did not know sin except through the law; for neither did I know coveting, except the law had said, “You shall not covet.”
But sin, seizing the opportunity through the commandment,
worked out in me coveting of every kind; for without the law sin is dead. (Romans 7:7,8)

The specific writings "engraved in stone" the Apostle Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit,
decribed as "the ministry of death".

Second Corinthians 3:7 - Moreover if the ministry of death, engraved in stone in letters, came about in glory, so that the sons of Israel were not able to gaze at the face of Moses . . .

It is not easy for me to say to you Ie. "God doesn't want us to love Him, have no other gods before Him or to honor our mother and father."
And I believe surely Christ lived this way to the uttermost. And God wants Christ to be our life.

But what can we do with 2 Cor. 3:7?
That which was engraved in stone by the finger of God eventually God reveals was a "ministry of death".

The "ministry of death, engraved in stone" is also "the ministry of condemnation".

Second Corinthians 3:9 - For if there is glory with the ministry of condemnation, much more the ministry of righteousness abounds with glory.

The law was able only to demand and condemn; it could not give life. There is no life in the law; there is only commandments.
Life is in Christ.
In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. (John 1:4)
You know that Jesus is the "life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45) the only one who is able to give God's life into us.

Paul's evaluation of the ten commandments engraved in stone does not escape his negative view.
In other words elsewhere he says Christ took these out of the way, abolishing them in His flesh, they were contrary to us, and Christ nailed them to His cross.

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

It must include what was written by the finger of God in stone tablets.
The keeping of the Sabbath was one of the ten commandments written in stone.
"Thou shalt not covet" was also one of the stone engraved commandments Paul says was death to him.

What then shall we say? Is the law sin? Absolutely not! But I did not know sin except through the law; for neither did I know coveting, except the law had said, “You shall not covet.”
But sin, seizing the opportunity through the commandment,
worked out in me coveting of every kind; for without the law sin is dead. (Romans 7:7,8)

The specific writings "engraved in stone" the Apostle Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit,
decribed as "the ministry of death".

Second Corinthians 3:7 - Moreover if the ministry of death, engraved in stone in letters, came about in glory, so that the sons of Israel were not able to gaze at the face of Moses . . .

It is not easy for me to say to you Ie. "God doesn't want us to love Him, have no other gods before Him or to honor our mother and father."
And I believe surely Christ lived this way to the uttermost. And God wants Christ to be our life.

But what can we do with 2 Cor. 3:7?
That which was engraved in stone by the finger of God eventually God reveals was a "ministry of death".

The "ministry of death, engraved in stone" is also "the ministry of condemnation".

Second Corinthians 3:9 - For if there is glory with the ministry of condemnation, much more the ministry of righteousness abounds with glory.

The law was able only to demand and condemn; it could not give life. There is no life in the law; there is only commandments.
Life is in Christ.
In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. (John 1:4)
You know that Jesus is the "life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45) the only one who is able to give God's life into us.

Paul's evaluation of the ten commandments engraved in stone does not escape his negative view.
In other words elsewhere he says Christ took these out of the way, abolishing them in His flesh, they were contrary to us, and Christ nailed them to His cross.

It can also only be understood in the way you described it. Thank you for being willing to say it.

 

[oikonomia]

It can also only be understood in the way you described it. Thank you for being willing to say it.

I thought is was a fair question and a challenging one.
If you have another angle on that question, I'd like to hear it.

You see Paul saying that there was a glory to the ministry of condemnation, yet a fading glory is helpful.
We often get pushback when we put the Torah in any kind of negative light.
A poster reacted strongly against me saying the Israelites were brought out of one bondage and into another.

This fading glory, a glory in Moses's face, which is now being surpassed by an unfading glory,
demonstrates there was a great positivity initially to the giving of the Torah.
It was glorious.

At the same time Paul says that those brought under this guardianship of law
differ not from slaves. So I have the ground to state they left one form of bondange and entered into another.

Galatians 4:1 - But I say, As long as the heir is a child, he does not differ at all from a slave, though he is lord of all;

They were glorious "slaves" but slaves under guardianship nonetheless.
And the glory of this custody was a fading glory. (2 Cor. 3:10,11)

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

If you have another angle on that question, I'd like to hear it.

Here is another angle. I'll just focus on the Colossians 2:14 passage in question:

Colossians 2:8–23 (NKJV)

8 Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. 9 For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; 10 and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power.​

​

11 In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. 13 And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, 14 having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. 15 Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.​

​

16 So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, 17 which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ. 18 Let no one cheat you of your reward, taking delight in false humility and worship of angels, intruding into those things which he has not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19 and not holding fast to the Head, from whom all the body, nourished and knit together by joints and ligaments, grows with the increase that is from God.​

​

20 Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations—21 “Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,” 22 which all concern things which perish with the using—according to the commandments and doctrines of men? 23 These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.​

As you can see, verse 14 is in the middle of an argument (which actually starts before verse 8 and ends after verse 23). We know these are linked together because vs. 11 has "also" near the beginning, verse 16 starts with "so", and verse 20 starts with "therefore". The unifying theme is that Christ Jesus personally houses all the fullness of the Godhead and we are complete in Him (Col. 2:9-10). Because of this, we need to be wary of people who would point us to something other than Christ (Col. 2:8) because He Himself is the full and final authority on all matters (Col. 2:10).

The second paragraph specifically points to the real things Jesus did for us, namely the circumcision of our hearts (infinitely separating our sins from us as far as the east is from the west), raising us from the dead (giving us spiritual life), and forgiving us all our trespasses (permanently and completely because His cross wiped out all our obligations to the law). It is no coincidence that these real things that Jesus did for us (circumcision, baptism, and deliverance from the law) have physical parallels that may be stumbling blocks.

These 4 paragraphs, which are linked together, are warning us to look to Jesus (who makes us complete and who is the head of all authority) instead of looking to the many stumbling blocks that may hinder us and distract us from focusing on Jesus Christ Himself (Christ in you, the hope of glory). I have underlined and bolded those passages above. The takeaway is in verse 23, "These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh." These things have no value against the indulgence of the flesh. Period.

 

[oikonomia]

As you can see, verse 14 is in the middle of an argument (which actually starts before verse 8 and ends after verse 23). We know these are linked together because vs. 11 has "also" near the beginning, verse 16 starts with "so", and verse 20 starts with "therefore". The unifying theme is that Christ Jesus personally houses all the fullness of the Godhead and we are complete in Him (Col. 2:9-10). Because of this, we need to be wary of people who would point us to something other than Christ (Col. 2:8) because He Himself is the full and final authority on all matters (Col. 2:10).

The second paragraph specifically points to the real things Jesus did for us, namely the circumcision of our hearts (infinitely separating our sins from us as far as the east is from the west), raising us from the dead (giving us spiritual life), and forgiving us all our trespasses (permanently and completely because His cross wiped out all our obligations to the law). It is no coincidence that these real things that Jesus did for us (circumcision, baptism, and deliverance from the law) have physical parallels that may be stumbling blocks.

These 4 paragraphs, which are linked together, are warning us to look to Jesus (who makes us complete and who is the head of all authority) instead of looking to the many stumbling blocks that may hinder us and distract us from focusing on Jesus Christ Himself (Christ in you, the hope of glory). I have underlined and bolded those passages above. The takeaway is in verse 23, "These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh." These things have no value against the indulgence of the flesh. Period.

That was very clear.

Do you think it is not wrong to count the Law given by God as included in "the traditions of men" and "the elements of the world"?

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

That was very clear.

Do you think it is not wrong to count the Law given by God as included in "the traditions of men" and "the elements of the world"?

I don't think those things particularly include the law itself. But I do think traditions and basic principles of the world include precepts which are based on the misuse of the law.

But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully (1 Ti 1:8) NKJV​

If used in the right way, it is good. An example of that is using it to convict of sin to point someone to Jesus for forgiveness. If used the wrong way, it is bad. An example of that is using it say rightness with God is through obeying the law. The latter falls into the two categories you mention.

 

[Gary K]

I don't think those things particularly include the law itself. But I do think traditions and basic principles of the world include precepts which are based on the misuse of the law.

But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully (1 Ti 1:8) NKJV​

If used in the right way, it is good. An example of that is using it to convict of sin to point someone to Jesus for forgiveness. If used the wrong way, it is bad. An example of that is using it say rightness with God is through obeying the law. The latter falls into the two categories you mention.

The only people that have said that were the Jews.

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

The only people that have said that were the Jews.

They are not the only ones. I have been in enough Baptist churches to experience it. And I wasn't talking about you because I remember your many statements to the contrary.

 

[Gary K]

They are not the only ones. I have been in enough Baptist churches to experience it. And I wasn't talking about you because I remember your many statements to the contrary.

As I have never been in a Baptist church I will recognize you as a more informed source than I am.

 

[oikonomia]

I don't think those things particularly include the law itself. But I do think traditions and basic principles of the world include precepts which are based on the misuse of the law.

But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully (1 Ti 1:8) NKJV​

If used in the right way, it is good. An example of that is using it to convict of sin to point someone to Jesus for forgiveness. If used the wrong way, it is bad. An example of that is using it say rightness with God is through obeying the law. The latter falls into the two categories you mention.

If you are up to it, I would like you to expound a verse in Galatians for us.
The thoroughness and clarity of your last exposition I enjoyed.

That is a little point that comes in quickly - Galatians 3:20.

But a mediator is not a mediator for one, but God is one.

I would also like to hear you say a word on the previous verse 19, that the law was "ordained through angels."
I have always had doubts about understanding that. Do you think Paul meant Christ as the Angel of the Lord or other angels?

Why then the law? It was added because of the transgressions until the seed should come to whom the promise was made, it being ordained through angels in the hand of a mediator. (v.19)

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

If you are up to it, I would like you to expound a verse in Galatians for us.
The thoroughness and clarity of your last exposition I enjoyed.

That is a little point that comes in quickly - Galatians 3:20.

But a mediator is not a mediator for one, but God is one.

I would also like to hear you say a word on the previous verse 19, that the law was "ordained through angels."
I have always had doubts about understanding that. Do you think Paul meant Christ as the Angel of the Lord or other angels?

Why then the law? It was added because of the transgressions until the seed should come to whom the promise was made, it being ordained through angels in the hand of a mediator. (v.19)

I don't actually know for sure what those two items related too. I suspect the mediator is a reference to Moses, who technically wasn't a mediator because God was acting on His own authority. Nevertheless, Moses did go between God and the rest of the Israelites. But like I said, I'm not sure.

I am positive, however, that the resolution of these two items has little, if any impact on the broader context which is meaningful and quite easy to understand.

 

[oikonomia]

I don't actually know for sure what those two items related too. I suspect the mediator is a reference to Moses, who technically wasn't a mediator because God was acting on His own authority. Nevertheless, Moses did go between God and the rest of the Israelites. But like I said, I'm not sure.

I am positive, however, that the resolution of these two items has little, if any impact on the broader context which is meaningful and quite easy to understand.

I am going to consider the mediator to be Moses for a season and see how it sits with me.
Thanks.

The footnotes of the Recovery Version draw a contrast between a covenant where two parties each have reciprical actions
and a promise in which one party, in this case God, promises unilaterally to fulfill something. (if I well understood the note).

But I have the joy of further study to do.

 

[Gary K]

I am going to consider the mediator to be Moses for a season and see how it sits with me.
Thanks.

The footnotes of the Recovery Version draw a contrast between a covenant where two parties each have reciprical actions
and a promise in which one party, in this case God, promises unilaterally to fulfill something. (if I well understood the note).

But I have the joy of further study to do.

The one and only mediator is Jesus.

I see now why you have some of the beliefs you have as you read a Bible that has it's theology baked into it. Recovery Version?

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

I am going to consider the mediator to be Moses for a season and see how it sits with me.
Thanks.

The footnotes of the Recovery Version draw a contrast between a covenant where two parties each have reciprical actions
and a promise in which one party, in this case God, promises unilaterally to fulfill something. (if I well understood the note).

But I have the joy of further study to do.

I do the same thing. I put placeholders on beliefs and test them for a while before resting my weight on them. Interestingly, I just today read a note I wrote a while back where I postulated something, then a few days/weeks later changed my mind. This strategy has served me well over the years.

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

The one and only mediator is Jesus.

I do agree with this too. I just think it's possible in this instance it is referring to Moses. Many times, "Mediator" is capitalized if it refers to Jesus, but in this case it is not. It's not definitive, though, so that's part of why I haven't made up my mind.

"For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus" (1 Ti 2:5) NKJV

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

I do agree with this too. I just think it's possible in this instance it is referring to Moses. Many times, "Mediator" is capitalized if it refers to Jesus, but in this case it is not. It's not definitive, though, so that's part of why I haven't made up my mind.

"For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus" (1 Ti 2:5) NKJV

Aparently capitalizing "mediator" is somewhat unique to NKJV.