The Perfect Law

[Soyeong]

This is one topic that I honestly feel God telling me to not argue or debate on. If a person goes back to the Old Law as their source of justification when it is clearly no longer binding, it is like they have tasted the new and have said the old is better.

...

Hold on, I never said anything about going back to the Mosaic Law as a source of justification. God had many reasons for giving the Law, but providing a means of justification was never one of them. According to Romans 4:1-8, Abraham was justified by faith, so God had no need to provide an alternative and unobtainable means of justification when a perfectly good means of justification by faith was already in place. Thinking that the Law is a source of justification has always been a fundamental misunderstanding of it and of God's character because it makes it out to be that what God primarily wants from us is our obedience when since the beginning with God walking with Adam in the Garden what God has primarily wanted from us is an intimate relationship with us, with His commands are instructions for how to grow in that relationship. There are many verses that describe the Mosaic Covenant as a marriage between God and Israel, such as with God describing Himself as her husband (Jeremiah 31:32), so the Mosaic Law is God's instructions for how to have an intimate relationship with Him. In Romans 9:30 - Romans 10:4, the reason why Israel failed to obtain righteousness was not because they did what God commanded them to and God gave them faulty commands, but because they misunderstood that the goal of the Law was a relationship with Christ for righteousness for everyone who has faith and tried to establish their own righteousness. In Titus 2:14, it does not say that Christ gave himself to free us from the Law, but to free us from all Lawlessness, so we should not go back to the bondage of the Lawlessness that he gave himself to free us from.

"But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain." (Titus 3:9).

In 2 Timothy 3:16-17, it says that all OT Scripture is God-breathed and profitable to equip us to do every good work, and God's Law instruct us how to do good works. In Titus 3:1-8, Paul is exhorting Titus to devote himself to doing good works. So you are interpreting Titus 3:9 as Paul saying that what he just said in the previous verses was unprofitable. Again, there is a big difference between disputing how to follow God's commands and disputing whether followers of God should follow God's commands.

The Scriptures I gave need no explanation. They stand against what you believe. You may have come up with a clever work around them, but that does not change what they say.

I have shown how the context is in regard to speaking man-man made opinions, traditions, and laws, so they only stand against what I believe when you take them out of context and twist them around to being against obeying the very commands of the God of the universe. None of the authors of the Bible ever spoke against anyone obeying God, but if you think that they did, then the bottom line is that you need to make a decision about whom has the higher authority and whom to follow.

 

[Soyeong]

The Law is not the end then... If we try to attain to the Law, after we are saved and are adopted into Christ, is that going back to law...?

It is our "mark" our bullseye, is it not...?

Or not...?

God Bless!

In Titus 2:11-14, it is saying that our salvation involves being trained by grace to do what is godly, righteous, and good, and to renounce doing what is ungodly and sinful, which is an accurate description of what the Mosaic Law was given to instruct how to do. In Titus 2:14, it does not say that Christ gave himself to redeem us from the Law, but to redeem us from all Lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, and God's Law is again His instructions for how to do every good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17, Acts 21:20). The goal of our sanctification is to be made to be like Christ, who only did what was holy, righteous, and good and refrained from sin in accordance with the Mosaic Law. Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and sin is defined as the transgressions of the Law (1 John 3:4), so our salvation is from living in transgression of the Law necessarily involves being made into someone who lives in obedience to it by grace through faith.

 

[Newlyrestoredgospel777]

James is writing to Jewish Christians. In his letter he says:

"But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing." (James 1:25)

"If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well." (James 2:8)

"So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty." (James 2:12).​

The perfect law, the law of liberty, the royal law. What is James referring to when he uses these terms?

There is the LAW, the WORD and The Prophet.
The Authority of the Kingdom of GOD has always been the LAW, THE WORD, And the PROPHET. Therefore, you cannot agree with one over the other because without both the LAW and the PROPHET, you no longer have the WORD of GOD.

The LAW and the Prophet are the two witnesses, the two olive trees, the two tablet stones who testify of GOD. Thus, the WORD of GOD is both the LAW and the Prophet.

Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

I did not come to abolish the LAW and the Prophets. Not to Abolish, but to fulfil.

Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

Mark 9 shows us JESUS our Supreme LORD, Moses, and Elijah transfigured. These are the personages of the LAW (Moses), the WORD (JESUS our Supreme LORD) and the Prophet (Elijah). The reason why it was those 3 Apostles who saw this is because Apostle James (LAW), Apostle Peter (the WORD) and Apostle John (the Prophet).

Both the LAW (OT LAW) and The Prophets (Major and Minor) testify of GOD and thus are the two witnesses. Therefore, if you don't have the LAW, you don't have the WORD. IF you don't have the Prophets, you don't have the WORD. Both the LAW and the Prophet together gives you the WORD of GOD.

GOD is the same yesterday, today and forever.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Hold on, I never said anything about going back to the Mosaic Law as a source of justification. God had many reasons for giving the Law, but providing a means of justification was never one of them. According to Romans 4:1-8, Abraham was justified by faith, so God had no need to provide an alternative and unobtainable means of justification when a perfectly good means of justification by faith was already in place. Thinking that the Law is a source of justification has always been a fundamental misunderstanding of it and of God's character because it makes it out to be that what God primarily wants from us is our obedience when since the beginning with God walking with Adam in the Garden what God has primarily wanted from us is an intimate relationship with us, with His commands are instructions for how to grow in that relationship. There are many verses that describe the Mosaic Covenant as a marriage between God and Israel, such as with God describing Himself as her husband (Jeremiah 31:32), so the Mosaic Law is God's instructions for how to have an intimate relationship with Him. In Romans 9:30 - Romans 10:4, the reason why Israel failed to obtain righteousness was not because they did what God commanded them to and God gave them faulty commands, but because they misunderstood that the goal of the Law was a relationship with Christ for righteousness for everyone who has faith and tried to establish their own righteousness. In Titus 2:14, it does not say that Christ gave himself to free us from the Law, but to free us from all Lawlessness, so we should not go back to the bondage of the Lawlessness that he gave himself to free us from.



In 2 Timothy 3:16-17, it says that all OT Scripture is God-breathed and profitable to equip us to do every good work, and God's Law instruct us how to do good works. In Titus 3:1-8, Paul is exhorting Titus to devote himself to doing good works. So you are interpreting Titus 3:9 as Paul saying that what he just said in the previous verses was unprofitable. Again, there is a big difference between disputing how to follow God's commands and disputing whether followers of God should follow God's commands.



I have shown how the context is in regard to speaking man-man made opinions, traditions, and laws, so they only stand against what I believe when you take them out of context and twist them around to being against obeying the very commands of the God of the universe. None of the authors of the Bible ever spoke against anyone obeying God, but if you think that they did, then the bottom line is that you need to make a decision about whom has the higher authority and whom to follow.

Do you believe a person sins if they eat unclean animals?
Do you believe that this effects their right standing with God?
Do you believe a person needs to keep the Saturday Sabbath?
Do you believe this effects their right standing with God?
Do you believe a person needs to be circumcised?
Do you believe this effects their right standing with God?

Important Note:

I am not against obedience as a part of faith and or the salvation process, but I believe we look primarily to the New Testament to obey God's commands and not the Old Testament. The ceremonial laws and judicial laws from the Old Testament are no longer binding. Christ nailed to the cross those ordinances that were against us.


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The Law is not the end then... If we try to attain to the Law, after we are saved and are adopted into Christ, is that going back to law...?

It is our "mark" our bullseye, is it not...?

Or not...?

God Bless!

When I speak of "the Law" in this case to the post you quote, I am speaking of jurisdiction as poster Apex pointed out.

In this case, the Torah or the Old Testament Law would sort of be like California law;
And the New Testament Law would sort of be like Colorado Law.
Whereas, Absolute Morality (or God's eternal moral laws for man) would be like Federal Law.

In the case of what I am talking about here would be like California Law.
For the written Law was for a certain purpose and time for the nation of Israel.
We no longer sacrifice animals, and circumcise each other anymore.

Hebrews 7:12 says the Law has changed.


...

 

[1213]

So the 10 commandments are included in this?

...he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. For the commandments, "You shall not commit adultery," "You shall not murder," "You shall not steal," "You shall not give false testimony," "You shall not covet," [TR adds "You shall not give false testimony,"] and whatever other commandments there are, are all summed up in this saying, namely, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." Love doesn't harm a neighbor. Love therefore is the fulfillment of the law.
Romans 13:8-10