True Justification, works of the Law of Moses, & Conditional Security

[stuart lawrence]

Although I answered his question differently. I agree with what you are saying here.

So you know what observing the law means based on your red emboldened. In order to sidedtep answering my question you told me I was being too vague when i used the words observing the law
You will do of say anything to deflect from answering the question. But you are not the only one

 

[expos4ever]

There is a lot of contextual evidence that supports the claim the "end of the Law is Christ for righteousness" teaching is Paul's way of saying "The Law has brought us to Christ". Sorry for the length.

Romans 9 through the first half of Romans 10 is a re-telling of the entire covenant history of Israel from Abraham to the exile and beyond. To the extent that this is shown to be the case, it would make sense that Romans 10:4 states that the appearance of Jesus represents a particular "point" in that history - the point that the Law (a central element of the covenant history) was leading to. Thus, Christ is the "end" as in the destination of where the Law was taking Israel's covenant history.

Paul’s re-telling of the narrative of Israel is detailed and is presented in perfect chronological sequence and is summarized following:

· In chapter 9, verses 1 to 5, Paul expresses his grief at the state of his fellow Jews. So we already have an indication that what is to come will have an Israel focus;

· In verses 7 through 13, we get Abraham, then Isaac, then Jacob. This is the beginning of the Israel story, set forth in precisely the correct sequence;

· In verses 15 through 18, we get Moses, Pharoah, and the events associated with the exodus;

· In verse 20, Paul is clearly alluding to the prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah and their declarations that, like a potter, God has the right to mold Israel as He sees fit.

· In verse 25, Paul quotes from Hosea 2, a text which deals with the threat of exile and the promise of restoration. And what happens at the time of restoration – God will say to those who were not His people (read: the Gentiles) that they are now indeed part of His family. This is clearly an allusion to various covenant promises in Genesis where Abraham is told that his seed – the Jews – will be “a light and blessing to the nations”.

· In verses 27 and then again in verse 29, we have a reference to Isaiah’s teaching about a remnant who will come out from exile.

· And, of course, verses 31 to 33 bring us to Paul’s time – the Jews have stumbled over the Christ and / or the Law.

· So, in chapter 9 we have a detailed re-telling of Israel’s story, from Abraham to Isaac, to Jacob, to the exodus, to God’s warning about reshaping Israel like a pot, to exile and the promise of restoration, and finally to the Jewish rejection of the Christ.

· But the story does not end there. In 10:1-3, Paul continues with his treatment of the sad state of Israel in the present time (that is, Paul’s time). Clearly, the Jews are still in exile, even if they are physically back in Palestine.

· Now every Jew who knows his Old Testament should have been able to predict what comes after exile – covenant renewal! And that is exactly where Paul takes us. In Romans 10:6, he quotes from a famous passage from Deuteronomy that describes the mercy after exile.

Now, is this all a coincidence? Has Paul re-told the entire narrative of Israel, presenting all its important elements in the correct order, without intending to see the bit about Christ as the end of the Law for righteousness as a statement about the role of the Law in bringing the unfolding story to its climax, that is, Christ?

Yes, Paul is saying that Christ is now the place where "righteousness" is to be found.

But, and we need to be clear on this, in saying so, Paul is certainly not saying that "good works" are not needed for someone to be declared righteous.

If he were to say that, we would have every right to call him on Romans 2:6-7, where he clearly declares such deeds are indeed required.

 

[stuart lawrence]

I wish to repent of my explanation of Romans 10:4 - my previous explanations of my position on that text have been misleading, I concede.

I think Paul's main point is that Christ is the "end" as in the destination of the Law of Moses - God uses the Law of Moses as part of the plan leading to the Cross. So Paul is saying Christ is where righteousness is to be found, but that the Law of Moses is an integral part of God's plan to get us there.

Does this mean that Paul is saying here in Romans 10:4 that the Law of Moses has come to an end? Well, implicitly yes. Paul believes that the goal of the Law has been met - Christ has done His work.

Therefore, he believes the Law of Moses can be set aside, having "done its job".

Either way, we know from other things Paul writes that the Law of Moses has been retired.

Paul's emphasis in Romans 10:4, though, is not that the Law has come to an end, but rather that the "destination" of the Law - the place in redemption history where the Law is leading is, yes, Christ.

More support in the next post.

According to romans 10:4 Christ is the end of the law unto righteousness. If this is so the christian cannot be made unrighteous in Gods sight concerning their imperfections concerning the law that exists(their sin) such a thing is not possible.
This can only be true if Jesus died for all their sin at Calvary, past, present and future
THE ABOVE IS WHAT I NEED DIRECTLY ADDRESSED
I don't need to know anything else, only a direct response to what I have written. I am sure you understand that!

 

[stuart lawrence]

Sor

So you know what observing the law means based on your red emboldened. In order to sidedtep answering my question you told me I was being too vague when i used the words observing the law
You will do of say anything to deflect from answering the question. But you are not the only one

Sorry, this wad meant for jlb

 

[stuart lawrence]

Can you read?????

Observing the law of Moses is a sin, because we are not to murder an innocent person for picking up sticks on the Sabbath when there is no law in effect that commands this action.


15 Work shall be done for six days, but the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. .
Exodus 31:15


By observing the law of Moses a person would have to obey this law, and since it's obsolete whoever carried out this law would be guilty of murder.


JLB

So you do know what observing the law means based on your red emboldened. You told me you didn't understand what it meant i was being too vague
I guess that was the best thing to say to avoid having to answer the question!

 

[expos4ever]

Stuart, you really need to stop bearing false witness. You asked me "In this context, is observing the law not committing sin"

I answered in post 1507 as follows:

This is an unclear question. Are you asking whether a person who fully observes the Law of Moses over their entire life would, therefore, not have committed sin? I would answer no - even perfect obedience to the Law of Moses does not mean you are sinless precisely because, as I answered before, there are many actions and thoughts that are sinful, but are not addressed by the Law of Moses

Or are you asking whether when you do a particular thing that the Law prescribes, are you sinning in doing so? I would answer no to that - it is certainly not sin to do what the Law tells you to do.

This is an answer.

You may not like it.

Or you may have follow-on questions.

But it most certainly is an answer.

Please answer what I am almost sure is a question that puts you in an awkward position:

What does Paul mean here?:

6God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.

 

[expos4ever]

According to romans 10:4 Christ is the end of the law unto righteousness. If this is so the christian cannot be made unrighteous in Gods sight concerning their imperfections concerning the law that exists(their sin) such a thing is not possible.
This can only be true if Jesus died for all their sin at Calvary, past, present and future
THE ABOVE IS WHAT I NEED DIRECTLY ADDRESSED

I question your interpretation which appears to be that Christ brings to an end any connection between doing the deeds of the Law of Moses and being awarded a status of righteousness on that basis. Or perhaps you mean that Christ brings an end to any connection between doing good deeds generally and, again, being awarded a status of righteousness on that basis.

As I have argued, I believe Paul is not saying this at all, but is rather saying that Christ is the end in the sense of being the destination of where the Law of Moses was headed in the great redemption narrative. And now righteousness is centred on Christ, not the Law of Moses. But to say that this leaves unanswered the question of whether righteousness through Christ requires that we do good works. All Paul is saying is that we have arrived at the point in God's plan where righteousness is connected to what Jesus did. And it is the Law that got things to that place.

But we know from Romans 2 and other places that good works are indeed required in order to be declared righteous at the end.

 

[Meowzltov]

But Paul directly says that it is:

For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

What do you think Paul means in these words?

I guess I don't know what it means.

 

[Meowzltov]

How can one read this text and think that the Law of Moses remains in force, given that heaven and earth are still here?

I think you mean the opposite.

 

[Meowzltov]

It is Jesus’ death on the Cross where He proclaims “It is accomplished”. Note how this dovetails perfectly with the 5:18 declaration that the Law would remain until all is accomplished.

Jesus on the cross is referring to his death being accomplished. But 5:18 says until ALL is accomplished, and ALL is not accomplished. For example, the gospel is to be spread to every living creature, Christ is to return, the resurrection is to take place, we will have the judgment.

 

[Meowzltov]

Which law.

Abraham walked in obedience to God's commandments and laws 430 years before the law of Moses was added.

God's laws are eternal.

Moses law was temporary.

ANY law. Mosaic law is still here. Not a jot or tittle shall fall away until heaven and earth shall fall away. It is STILL unlawful for a JEW to pick up sticks on the Shabbat.

 

[Meowzltov]

I agree, but Paul also promoted the idea that Jews also should stop following the Law. Yes, Paul did, at times, follow the Law but I think we can reasonably assume he did this as a pragmatic measure to not offend - the case that Paul sees the Law of Moses as retired fully for all is really very strong indeed:

23But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed. 24Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith.25But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

Is this not crystal clear?

It doesn't say what you think it says. The apostles still obeyed Jewish law and taught other Jewish believers to do so also. James bragged that there were thousands of Jewish believers in Jerusalem who were all zealous for Torah.

 

[Meowzltov]

What makes this really hard is that we all have different understandings of what the word "law" means. I agree with you that it is crystal clear that the Law of Moses is now retired - I do not see how one can faithfully read scripture and think otherwise.

I think that Mosaic Law is for Jews, as ever. I think that Natural Law (as the NT discusses) is for Gentiles, as ever.

 

[Meowzltov]

I think I get what you are saying now and if that is the case, I am going to have to say... "no." Granted, the Law of Moses was for the Jew at one point in time (Before the cross). However, after the cross (i.e. the death of Christ), the Old Law was abrogated or abolished and believers today follow the New Covenant Law or Commands. Both Jews and Gentiles follow the New Covenant Law now. For there is no difference between the Jews and the Gentiles now. For no believer today obeys the Old Law in sacrificing animals. No believer today is obligated to be circumcised today. No believer today is forbidden to eat unclean animals. No believer today is to render an eye for an eye any longer but they are to turn the other cheek now. For Scripture says the Law has changed (Hebrews 7:12).


...

Jesus never abrogated the Mosaic law. In fact he said that it would never pass away until heaven and earth passed away.

We have the example of the Jewish apostles themselves. Paul testified under oath that he had kept every law. James bragged about the thousands of Jewish believers in Jerusalem who were all zealous for Torah.

It is the law that sacrifice only be made at the Temple. By not offering sacrifice outside the Temple, we Jews are keeping the law.

An eye for an eye is for CIVIL JUSTICE. Turning the other cheek is how things work on a PERSONAL level. You really want BOTH.

 

[stuart lawrence]

N

Stuart, you really need to stop bearing false witness. You asked me "In this context, is observing the law not committing sin"

I answered in post 1507 as follows:


This is an answer.

You may not like it.

Or you may have follow-on questions.

But it most certainly is an answer.

Please answer what I am almost sure is a question that puts you in an awkward position:

What does Paul mean here?:

6God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.

No that is certainly not an answer to a straightforward question. It is clear you have done nothing but try and avoid answering what you knew was asked
And now you accuse me of bearing false witness

 

[stuart lawrence]

I guess I don't know what it means.

The law comes I two parts, the law itself that is to be obeyed and the penalty attached for breaking it. The first remains, the second was removed as Christ died for our sins at Calvary. Hence. Christ is the end of the law unto righteousness for everyone who believeth

 

[stuart lawrence]

I question your interpretation which appears to be that Christ brings to an end any connection between doing the deeds of the Law of Moses and being awarded a status of righteousness on that basis. Or perhaps you mean that Christ brings an end to any connection between doing good deeds generally and, again, being awarded a status of righteousness on that basis.

As I have argued, I believe Paul is not saying this at all, but is rather saying that Christ is the end in the sense of being the destination of where the Law of Moses was headed in the great redemption narrative. And now righteousness is centred on Christ, not the Law of Moses. But to say that this leaves unanswered the question of whether righteousness through Christ requires that we do good works. All Paul is saying is that we have arrived at the point in God's plan where righteousness is connected to what Jesus did. And it is the Law that got things to that place.

But we know from Romans 2 and other places that good works are indeed required in order to be declared righteous at the end.

Tell me something. If you believed the penalty of sin had been removed from your life would you use such knowledge to then happily sin as much as you wanted to?
If you did, you couldn't in your heart love God could you?
You may question what i wrote, but you cannot refute it can you. What you don't understand is this. Removing the penalty of sin is victory over sin. But the human mind cannot comprehend such truth, only the holy spirit can convict you of such truth
Therefore because you believe if what I wrote is correct a person is free from obligation to obey, you go all round the houses trying to avoid answering the points I made for though you cannot refute them, you refuse to accept them
A true christian does not obey because the penalty of sin is in place, they obey because in their heart they want to obey!;

 

[JLB777]

Pure deflection
Sin is transgression of the law

Is observing the law not committing sin?

I know, deflect, deflect, deflect

If Christ is the end of the law unto righteousness can a person be made unrighteous for their imperfections concerning that law( their sin)

I know, deflect, deflect, deflect

Please don't tell me no law exists it has been written on the mind and placed on the heart of the christian(heb10:16&17)
The law written on stone has been placed there( 2cor3:3)

To not sin, a person has to keep all the law of Moses, otherwise he is a transgressor of all the law.

For whoever shall keep the whole law, yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all.
James 2:10

Likewise if you don't stone an adulterer to death, then you are guilty of all the law.

So to observe the law, that says put to death a person for picking up sticks on the Sabbath is the sin of murder, since the law of Moses has been made obsolete.
Hebrews 8:13

Observing the law of Moses is sin.


JLB

 

[JLB777]

Tell me something. If you believed the penalty of sin had been removed from your life would you use such knowledge to then happily sin as much as you wanted to?
If you did, you couldn't in your heart love God could you?
You may question what i wrote, but you cannot refute it can you. What you don't understand is this. Removing the penalty of sin is victory over sin. But the human mind cannot comprehend such truth, only the holy spirit can convict you of such truth
Therefore because you believe if what I wrote is correct a person is free from obligation to obey, you go all round the houses trying to avoid answering the points I made for though you cannot refute them, you refuse to accept them
A true christian does not obey because the penalty of sin is in place, they obey because in their heart they want to obey!;

Do you obey the law of Moses?

The law requires you to offer burnt offerings of animals, and to travel to Jerusalem to keep the Passover, as well as the feast of Pentecost.

Do you stone people to death for picking up sticks on the Sabbath?


You no more observe the law of Moses than the man in the moon.


JLB

 

[JLB777]

ANY law. Mosaic law is still here. Not a jot or tittle shall fall away until heaven and earth shall fall away. It is STILL unlawful for a JEW to pick up sticks on the Shabbat.

You left out a word from your scripture you quoted.

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. Matthew 5:18


Paul also uses this word in describing the law.


What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made... Galatians 3:19


Jesus said in another place.

“The law and the prophets were until John. Since that time the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is pressing into it. Luke 16:16


The word until used by Jesus and Paul, shows that the law was indeed in force UNTIL IT WASN'T.


Until has come, and His name is Jesus.




JLB