True. . .but the law was never given for righteousness, because since Abraham, righteousness has been only by faith
(Galatians 3:21-22).
The law was given only to reveal sin (Romans 3:20, Romans 7:7).
God is the Light. So righteousness is always through faith. I'm sure Paul was not denying any of the above when he described two different forms of righteousness. And neither am I. I don't believe either one of us is saying that righteousness can be attained through the works of the law apart from faith in God and His Christ.
And the relation of this to God's retaliation in the punishment of sin in Romans 1:18-32?
There is no direct relation as I was not addressing that issue. I was trying to explain what I mean by two forms of righteousness.
There has always been only one standard of righteousess, the righteousness of God, which no one can even approach and, therefore, all righteousness is, and has been, since Abraham, from God only through faith in the promise (Jesus Christ). (Romans 1:17).
Sometimes I doubt we're talking about the same thing. Because I am certain that turn the other cheek and return good for evil is a higher standard of righteousness than an eye for an eye.
Receiving in themselves more degradation and lust for sin; i.e., punishing their sin of degradation with a desire in themselves for more degradation (sin) and ruin.
Respectfully, I don't see it that way. God cares deeply about us and our wellbeing more than we can possibly know. I don't see the logic of hating sin and punishing our sin with more sin which He hated in the first place. I see it the same as portrayed in the Father of the prodigal son. The Father let his son go and didn't stop him, as much as he wanted to.
As the NT mentions no wrath of God regarding the crucifixion.
Yes, in regards to the crucifying, the scorn, the mocking, the beatings. But not only that, the semantics in scripture don't even allow for the crucifixion to be His wrath. For one, scripture never even mentions once that the crucifixion was God's wrath. And secondly because scripture stipulates many times over that some person/s other than God crucified His son.
Clare 73 said: And that same Son paid the penalty for sin on the cross so God could have mercy without violating his justice.
Childeye responds: Respectfully, I don't see how the law was preventing God from having mercy because it would violate His justice.
Clare 73 responds back: It is not the law which prevents God from mercy, it is his character that prevents such.
Childeye says: It's as if your saying that showing mercy is not a just act or that there was a law against mercy/compassion.
Clare answers: There is. . the law of justice, which requires that everyone be given what he is owed--penalty for sin.
Respectfully none of this really makes any sense. It's not the law because it is the law? To me it's a form of circular reasoning. Mercy/compassion are attributes of God's Holy Character. He would not be subject to any law much less invent one that would forbid mercy just so as to maintain fairness, even because mercy/compassion is greater than justice.
Justice and righteousness are the foundation of his throne (Psalms 89:14).
Righteousness is based in justice, they cannot be separated. Justice is giving everyone his due, what he is owed, what he has earned.
God is not righteous and just if he does not do that.
But that's exactly what He did. He gave His son to die to pay our penalty. Jesus didn't earn or deserve death according to the law, but according to the law, we did.
To vindicate his justice and righteousness, he must punish law breaking (sin), which he does with (eternal) death.
He cannot, without showing favoritism, forgive some and not others without their being given what they are owed.
But if that's the case with the Christ, we're not getting what we're owed by way of penalty. It's God who is providing the lamb to be sacrificed. We're not suffering anything as a payment for our sin, unless we count bearing with and forgiving those who sin against us justice. Kind of like paying a debt forward. Jesus did say whoever didn't pick up their own cross were unworthy of him. The merciful will receive mercy seems just to me.
So let's look at it from this angle. The serpent deceived the woman which led to disobedience and sin and death, wherefore it makes me think that this is why Jesus said that Satan was a murderer from the beginning. And God declared He would put enmity between the serpent and the woman, and between the serpents seed and her seed; "it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel".
Through this lens, The serpent got what was coming to him by way of justice when Jesus defeated Satan at the cross, and at the same time mankind was able to be delivered through the same justice.
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
God foreshadowed his method of dealing with sin in justice in the OT sacrifices, which Jesus fulfilled in his NT sacrifice.
I can't agree exactly. I agree that guilt/sin offerings that could never take away sin or purge the conscience foreshadowed the sacrifice of the lamb of God that does. But I think it's clear that Jesus came down because God had no pleasure in the sacrifices of goats and animals that could never take away sin, but rather He desired mercy and understanding and the knowledge of God as the method for dealing with sin.
Childeye said: Wouldn't it be better to say that it was God's mercy that sent His son to be sacrificed so that sins could be forgiven?
I think I made that point very clearly.
Well if you notice in my statement the mercy comes before the death of Christ, so the law couldn't have prevented God from having mercy. Compassion and mercy are Godly Character traits and there is no law that could change that.
But what made Jesus' sacrifice necessary for mercy in the first place? (God's justice)
My answer would be vanity. However the scriptures say it this way:
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.. So the law was weak through the flesh.
We can forgive offenses against us, but we can't forgive sin (breaking God's law), which is God's prerogative. Only God can forgive sin (Mark 2:7).
Not a good example from scripture, but I get what you're saying. The issue of breaking faith with God is the way I would describe it. Because we break faith if we sin willfully against others even if they forgive us.
So God got in bed with the devil to administer his Mosaic Covenant?
I can't say for certain and I wouldn't characterize it as getting in bed. More like the Old Covenant was the means to put a hook in the mouth of leviathan. I know the law was received at the disposition of angels according to scripture, and Ezekiel 28 seems to be alluding to Satan as a covering Cherub, just like the one's depicted on the ark. And the law is the power of sin wherefore scripture is at the least indicating that Satan was disarmed by the blotting out of the ordinances that were against us.
Matthew 21:39,
The wicked husbandmen murdered the owners son.
John 12:31, "Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out."
1 Corinthians 2,
8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
Colossians 2:14,
14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
Ephesians 6:12
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Hebrews 2:14,
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
That is totally contrived, unfounded and without warrant--a desperate attempt to make God's ways agree with our ways.
That's an interesting response. Then what do you think purging the conscience means in scripture?
2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.
