What exactly is the law?

[Tangible]

OK I have used terms such as superceded which expresses to me the meaning of Jer 31:31-34. God says very clearly through Jeremiah the would be replaced and not like the one already made. Heb 8 says built on better promises not law (required performance).

That's why I don't like the term 'law of faith' though it is used in scripture. It is faith in the promises of God, specifically in his promise to save us for the sake of Christ, through which God saves us.

Now tell me what the effect of this is in reality for the Christian. Some seem to say there is no difference while Jeremiah says there is. Not according to has nothing to do with place or material on which something is recorded.

I'll quote the passage for those watching from the cheap seats.

Jer 31"Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, 32not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord. 33But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, "Know the Lord," for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more."

Please elaborate on what you are saying about this. I don't quite follow you.

Yes the righteousness that Christ has and imparts to me is er well was alien (not mine). That is not the present case however.

Do you now have a righteousness that is apart from the alien righteousness of Christ?

The law of faith is something that is real and works in all areas of my life.

Perhaps you would consent to fleshing out your understanding of this 'law of faith'?

What is the law of Christ? I do not think Paul uses it in a rhetorical way. Does Gal 6:2 coincide with the love one another statement of Jesus?

[Gal 6:1Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted. 2Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. 3For if anyone thinks he is something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself. 4But let each one test his own work, and then his reason to boast will be in himself alone and not in his neighbor. 5For each will have to bear his own load.]

Thus it would be a law (command of Jesus). If you are talking about something I need a reference. From what do you get this understanding?

If I understand you, I would say yes, this coincides with Jesus' summation of the Law as 'Love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself.'

The thing is, we are no more capable of keeping this law than any iteration of God's Law that came before. In fact, it seems to be Jesus' intention to remove all self-deception that we may have about being capable of keeping God's perfect Law.

Jesus is, in effect, cranking up the power of the Law to it's full power. "Be perfect," and not only be perfect, but "Have been perfect since you were conceived."

As St. James says, if you have transgressed the Law in one [tiny] part, you are guilty of transgressing the whole law.

The

law failed in this aspect.

How so? Do we not have functioning societies and nations governed by laws based upon knowledge of right and wrong (well, for the most part )? I'll grant that man's inhumanity to man is rampant in this world. Imagine what it would be like if it was totally unrestrained. /shudders

I buy that.

Cool.

I guess you can claim being led by the law which brings death. I like being led by the Spirit which imparts life.

Perhaps you have misunderstood. It is being led by the Spirit that leads us to look to the Law to learn to love it, meditate on it, and to keep it ever before us like David did. But we don't do it out of compulsion or in an effort to please or appease God. That has been accomplished for us by Christ. We do it out of reverent, joyful, free and willing obedience in response to the unmerited favor God has shown to us.

 

[Tangible]

Now that hits the nail on the head.

The truth seems to that we need to be righteous in the sight of men to be righteous in God's eyes. Maybe that is our whole problem.

bugkiller

No. That puts us back under slavery to the Law and the whims of public opinion and cultural expectations.

God's righteousness will be shown by those being saved through the love they have for their neighbors, but the neighbors do not get to dictate what their righteousness should look like. Sometimes loving your neighbor means standing in opposition to his harmful and ungodly desires. Sometimes loving one neighbor means condemning and punishing another.

That's why righteousness before men can only be trusted so far. We are to be God-pleasers, not man-pleasers.

And as I said before, faith in Christ is not a prerequisite for appearing righteous before men. Gandhi looked very righteous, but did not have faith in Christ alone for his justification.

 

[Nanopants]

I consider it a small miracle when believers 'see' that there is symbolism in such accounts. So, for your reading and understanding pleasure:

[FONT=&quot]“TO DESTROY THE WORKS OF THE DEVIL.”
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]This is the “work” that The Living Word, Jesus, came to do and DID.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Jesus’ Work transpires:[/FONT]

John 9:4
I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.

[FONT=&quot]"While I am in the world, I am the Light of the world."[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]"When He had said this, He spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and applied the clay to his eyes,[/FONT][FONT=&quot] and said to him, "Go, wash in the pool of Siloam." So he went away and washed, and came back seeing.”[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Neither this man NOR his parents sinned! [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The most interesting part (to me, among other things) is the place where he was told to wash...the pool of Siloam.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The translators thought kindly enough to put in the meaning of Siloam in parenthesis (sent one) which they sometimes do where there is (perhaps) a vagueness.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The (possible) reason for the vagueness is that SILOAM also has a ROOT WORD in Hebrew which also means SENT AWAY ONE as well i.e. this word, Siloam can be both “sent one” and “sent away one.”
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The translators could have recognized the shining brilliance of BOTH TERMS.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Siloam {sil-o-am'}[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] of Hebrew origin 7975; n pr loc[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]AV - Siloam 3; 3[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Siloam = "sent"[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]7975[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Shiloach {shee-lo'-akh} or (in imitation of 07974) Shelach[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] from 7971; n pr loc[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] AV - Siloah 2; 2[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] Shiloah or Siloah = "sent"[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]7971[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]shalach {shaw-lakh'}[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] a primitive root--[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1) to send, send away[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1a4) to let loose[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1c1) to send off or away or out [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]So AT THIS POOL of SILOAM we have a picture--->>> the place of washing to receive SIGHT.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Water is often times ASSOCIATED with The Word. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The Pool of Siloam (can) mean both Shiloah (The sent one-Blind Man) and Shalach...(the sent away one-the BLINDING POWER OF SIN and EVIL present! the DEVIL upon that man, blinding him.) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The ONE sent AWAY from the blind man was the EVIL ONE in the flesh of that man that caused his blindness.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Now you have your object lesson from Jesus.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Can you 'see' this?[/FONT]

If so, it's a miracle!

s

Indeed. To take that a step further...

Jesus said to her, "Did I not say to you that if you would believe you would see the glory of God?" -John 11:40

But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord. -2 Cor 3:18

So, you see, to "see" the glory of the Lord through the eyes of faith is to be cleansed of our unrighteousness. It's interesting that you brought up "the place of washing to receive sight," but perhaps, we are not washed in order to see, but in seeing, we are cleansed.

 

[squint]

Indeed. To take that a step further...

Jesus said to her, "Did I not say to you that if you would believe you would see the glory of God?" -John 11:40

But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord. -2 Cor 3:18

So, you see, to "see" the glory of the Lord through the eyes of faith is to be cleansed of our unrighteousness. It's interesting that you brought up "the place of washing to receive sight," but perhaps, we are not washed in order to see, but in seeing, we are washed clean.

Very much symbolic. It was not so much about 'dirt' and 'spit' or even the pool of Siloam from the physical/literal perspective.

Even in said pool it was only when an Angel 'troubled' the waters that the first one going into same was cleansed.

The structure of The Word is basic.

God in Christ is 'for or in behalf of man.' And God in Christ is 'against or in resistance to satan and devils.'

The Word is divided in a clear and clean cut between these parties even though PRESENTLY there is an overlap of same in the flesh.

It's quite interesting in this way.

The Law itself takes on much more interesting meanings when we factor in the 'unseen' lawless. IN this direction what the Law conveys is quite priceless.

It's treasures however remain purposefully hidden. Even in plain sight.

s

 

[bugkiller]

That's why I don't like the term 'law of faith' though it is used in scripture. It is faith in the promises of God, specifically in his promise to save us for the sake of Christ, through which God saves us.

I'll quote the passage for those watching from the cheap seats.

Jer 31"Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, 32not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord. 33But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, "Know the Lord," for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more."

Please elaborate on what you are saying about this. I don't quite follow you.

I suggest a careful study on the highlighted aspects of the passage will do much good. These are the focal points for me. I have posted studies on the highlighted before and more than once. They are very lengthy posts. NTL the opposition will not acept them nor have they been able to refute them. Ususally there is not even a discussion. Then I suggest a close reading of the Gospels, especially Matthew, Mark and Luke.[/quote]

Do you now have a righteousness that is apart from the alien righteousness of Christ? [/quote]Nope!! And that alien righteousness of Christ is in my possession as a gift and is no longer an alien.

Perhaps you would consent to fleshing out your understanding of this 'law of faith'?

Sure an excellent example would be the law of fatih is really what starts my truck. You say no and I say if I did not believe putting a key in the ignition switch and turning wpoould not start my truck, I would not do it. When my faith is denied I set out to find a cause and having strong faith upon remeding the problem again put my key in the ignition switch and turn it believing my truck will now start. Very rarely is my faith not reqarded. It is this very same faith in the work of Jesus that effects my salvation and secures my righteousness as required by God my Father.

If I understand you, I would say yes, this coincides with Jesus' summation of the Law as 'Love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself.'

The thing is, we are no more capable of keeping this law than any iteration of God's Law that came before. In fact, it seems to be Jesus' intention to remove all self-deception that we may have about being capable of keeping God's perfect Law.

I think there is a problem in understanding love.I also think that one may believe loving God keeps them from sinning. I would not agree to that in any way. If that were so then I do not think we would have I John 1:9-2:1.

Jesus is, in effect, cranking up the power of the Law to it's full power. "Be perfect," and not only be perfect, but "Have been perfect since you were conceived."

I believe this is also misunderstood and used (really abused) as a manipulation ploy. I fully recommend a word study on the word perfect.

As St. James says, if you have transgressed the Law in one [tiny] part, you are guilty of transgressing the whole law.

But James is not implying the law be observed.

How so? Do we not have functioning societies and nations governed by laws based upon knowledge of right and wrong (well, for the most part )? I'll grant that man's inhumanity to man is rampant in this world. Imagine what it would be like if it was totally unrestrained. /shudders

Yeppers there is no sin being committed as I type this answer. The law is most effective and has stopped sin dead in its tracks.

Cool. Perhaps you have misunderstood. It is being led by the Spirit that leads us to look to the Law to learn to love it, meditate on it, and to keep it ever before us like David did. But we don't do it out of compulsion or in an effort to please or appease God. That has been accomplished for us by Christ. We do it out of reverent, joyful, free and willing obedience in response to the unmerited favor God has shown to us.

Hmmm! the Spirit does not do that for me. I do not love to think about not murdering my neighbor. I simply have no desire to do so and would not even consider it. That does not mean satan does not try to get me to murder my neighbor. The idea usually gets dismissed and it is not because of the law.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

No. That puts us back under slavery to the Law and the whims of public opinion and cultural expectations.

And there you have it. The problem is man and not the real facts of the current covenant. Man (satan) wants control over us (our souls). This is both a single and double statement. Man aids satan through vanity and brings us to distruction (death) by the law. So ya gonna let peer pressure destroy you?

God's righteousness will be shown by those being saved through the love they have for their neighbors, but the neighbors do not get to dictate what their righteousness should look like. Sometimes loving your neighbor means standing in opposition to his harmful and ungodly desires. Sometimes loving one neighbor means condemning and punishing another.

That's why righteousness before men can only be trusted so far. We are to be God-pleasers, not man-pleasers.

Then why submit to men? Why do they try? Is it really men being submitted to? Will it destroy your soul?

And as I said before, faith in Christ is not a prerequisite for appearing righteous before men. Gandhi looked very righteous, but did not have faith in Christ alone for his justification.

I will second that.

bugkiller

 

[fhansen]

Not what the Scripture says. Sorry.

bugkiller

What's your concept of the law? Is it opposed to human nature? Or are humans opposed to their own true natures, and therefore to the law, due to the Fall? I think we'd agree that the law is at least superfluous if one is under grace, living in the Spirit. But I think I'm still missing something in your understanding of the law

 

[bugkiller]

What's your concept of the law? Is it opposed to human nature? Or are humans opposed to their own true natures, and therefore to the law, due to the Fall? I think we'd agree that the law is at least superfluous if one is under grace, living in the Spirit. But I think I'm still missing something in your understanding of the law

What exactly do you think is human nature? If it is natural why would one be told not to do something?

No it is not related to the fall. God gave man a free will choice. We always naturally choose to rebel - do evil (sin). That is precisely why reverse psychology works.

bugkiller

 

[fhansen]

What exactly do you think is human nature? If it is natural why would one be told not to do something?

But, then, why did God tell man not to do something, if the commandment went against man's nature? And then, by the bible's account, blame man for failing to obey anyway?

]

 

[bugkiller]

But, then, why did God tell man not to do something, if the commandment went against man's nature? And then, by the bible's account, blame man for failing to obey anyway?

]

What is the purpose of the law?

bugkiller

 

[fhansen]

What is the purpose of the law?

bugkiller

To teach us that we can't obey it-at least on our own.

 

[from scratch]

Abe's faith was credited to him as righteousness, because it led to obedience- of God's command! That's what James is referring to:

20 You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless[d]? 21 Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? 22 You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. 23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,”[e] and he was called God’s friend. 24 You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone. James 2:20-24

Abe's righteousness was actual, not merely imputed.

I don't think that is the question before us. How can a person be righteous and lie at the same time? Is Abraham's righteousness positional and not actual? I'm not disputing the fact Abraham may be known by men as righteous. Is that rightousness the righteousness God requires?

 

[squint]

I don't think that is the question before us. How can a person be righteous and lie at the same time? Is Abraham's righteousness positional and not actual? I'm not disputing the fact Abraham may be known by men as righteous. Is that rightousness the righteousness God requires?

Abraham did try to pull the wool over Gods Eyes about himself:

Genesis 18:27 And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes:

 

[from scratch]

As bugkiller says, you can distinguish between this law or that law, but its all still God's Law. I believe St. Paul is speaking specifically of the revealed law in these passages.

The question is does God make a distinction?

 

[from scratch]

Abraham did try to pull the wool over Gods Eyes about himself:

Genesis 18:27 And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes:

Is that from the baloney or hot dog factory?

And with this post I have exceeded my self imposed limit. So till we meet again

 

[fhansen]

I don't think that is the question before us. How can a person be righteous and lie at the same time? Is Abraham's righteousness positional and not actual? I'm not disputing the fact Abraham may be known by men as righteous. Is that rightousness the righteousness God requires?

God's will is perfectly just/righteous. Abraham obeyed God's will.

 

[from scratch]

God's will is perfectly just/righteous. Abraham obeyed God's will.

I'm sure a few here will tell you this was not the law Abraham obeyed.

 

[squint]

Is that from the baloney or hot dog factory?

And with this post I have exceeded my self imposed limit. So till we meet again

I know. You do not like to hear that Abraham had the Law either.

It is in your favorite Grace book, Galatians.

 

[bugkiller]

I know. You do not like to hear that Abraham had the Law either.

It is in your favorite Grace book, Galatians.

Do you have a passage in mind showing Abraham had the law?

bugkiller

 

[squint]

Do you have a passage in mind showing Abraham had the law?

bugkiller

Many. You are unawares?

how can you have an engaging discussion if you don't know?