Why do people try to obey the law when it's not possible

[mark273]

New Covenant. It covers everything we need to know.

How does it "cover" everything? What does that mean? How is that an answer to my question?

How do you interpret the two verses I posted about keeping God's commands?

 

[dollarsbill]

How does it "cover" everything? What does that mean? How is that an answer to my question?

The NT covers EVERYTHING we need to know for salvation and living a Godly life.

How do you interpret the two verses I posted about keeping God's commands?

Which 2 verses?

 

[mark273]

2 Kings 18:6 and Luke 1:6. We could throw in Deuteronomy 30:11, but let's talk about the first two verses first.

 

[dollarsbill]

2 Kings 18:6 and Luke 1:6. We could throw in Deuteronomy 30:11, but let's talk about the first two verses first.

Can you make your question more specific?

 

[mark273]

You are amazing. Let's go slowly. Your main point has been that no one can keep the law. The two verses I cited, namely, 2 Kings 18:6 and Luke 1:6, show that at least three people other than Jesus kept the law in their lives. Those two verses prove that your main point is incorrect.

Now those verses do not say they never sinned, it simply says they kept God's commands and laws. Keeping the law is not the same thing as never sinning.

 

[dollarsbill]

You are amazing. Let's go slowly. Your main point has been that no one can keep the law.

My main point is that Christians are under the New Covenant, not the Law.

The two verses I cited, namely, 2 Kings 18:6 and Luke 1:6, show that at least three people other than Jesus kept the law in their lives. Those two verses prove that your main point is incorrect.

Only Jesus was sinless.

Now those verses do not say they never sinned, it simply says they kept God's commands and laws. Keeping the law is not the same thing as never sinning.

They were under the Law. Christians are not. We have the New Covenant.

 

[mark273]

My main point is that Christians are under the New Covenant, not the Law.

Only Jesus was sinless.

They were under the Law. Christians are not. We have the New Covenant.

I am going to stop now because you refuse to interact with what I am saying. I may as well be giving you a recipe for potato salad.

I know and agree with you that everyone sinned.

I know and agree with you that we believers are not under law but under grace.

I never debated against or disagreed with those two ideas.

And the Bible says a lot more the topic that answers basic question such as, why do we still have the Old Testament in our Bibles? And what does it mean to keep the law? And why is even the Old Testament profitable for teaching believers today how to live godly lives? (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

 

[Gregory Thompson]

And the Bible says a lot more the topic that answers basic question such as, why do we still have the Old Testament in our Bibles? And what does it mean to keep the law? And why is even the Old Testament profitable for teaching believers today how to live godly lives? (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

The OT is useful for meditation if you're skilled enough . if you're not . it just confuses the main point which is to love everyone .

 

[mark273]

The OT is useful for meditation if you're skilled enough . if you're not . it just confuses the main point which is to love everyone .

That is interesting because both Jesus (Matthew 22:37-40) and Paul (Romans 13:8-10) said that the whole point of the OT law was to promote loving everyone. They said that you could sum up the message of the law by saying that we should love God and others and that if you are loving others, then you are fulfilling what the law requires.

The New Testament is much more positive toward the Old Testament and the law than you are.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

That is interesting because both Jesus (Matthew 22:37-40) and Paul (Romans 13:8-10) said that the whole point of the OT law was to promote loving everyone. They said that you could sum up the message of the law by saying that we should love God and others and that if you are loving others, then you are fulfilling what the law requires.

The New Testament is much more positive toward the Old Testament and the law than you are.

Since the law is summed up .. why complicate things?

 

[mark273]

We "complicate" things because our Lord Jesus maintained the authority of the Old Testament. When he said that he did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it (Matthew 5:17), we must understand that whatever the word "fulfill" means, it cannot mean "abolish".

There is a reason the Old Testament is still included in our Bibles. For two thousand years, the Old Testament has been regarded by the mainstream Christian tradition as a non-negotiable part of the Christian canon. It is a necessary part of God's special revelation to us as believers, and will be so forever. We need it. We cannot do without it.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

We "complicate" things because our Lord Jesus maintained the authority of the Old Testament. When he said that he did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it (Matthew 5:17), we must understand that whatever the word "fulfill" means, it cannot mean "abolish".

There is a reason the Old Testament is still included in our Bibles. For two thousand years, the Old Testament has been regarded by the mainstream Christian tradition as a non-negotiable part of the Christian canon. It is a necessary part of God's special revelation to us as believers, and will be so forever. We need it. We cannot do without it.

I take the gospel accounts in context.

Matthew 5:17 & Luke 24:44 balance each other out.

What Jesus was talking about was fulfilled at the cross

Colossians 2 Speaks of this saying the power of the written code was cancelled in the act of saving you.

So now the law only has said power .. if you give it that power by following it. but in doing so you fall from grace.

 

[woodpecker]

I take the gospel accounts in context.

Matthew 5:17 & Luke 24:44 balance each other out.

What Jesus was talking about was fulfilled at the cross

Colossians 2 Speaks of this saying the power of the written code was cancelled in the act of saving you.

So now the law only has said power .. if you give it that power by following it. but in doing so you fall from grace.

 

[dollarsbill]

I am going to stop now because you refuse to interact with what I am saying. I may as well be giving you a recipe for potato salad.

Interact? Because we don't agree?

I know and agree with you that everyone sinned.

I know and agree with you that we believers are not under law but under grace.

I never debated against or disagreed with those two ideas.

And the Bible says a lot more the topic that answers basic question such as, why do we still have the Old Testament in our Bibles? And what does it mean to keep the law? And why is even the Old Testament profitable for teaching believers today how to live godly lives? (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

The OT exists to warn us what happens to those who rebel against God.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

The OT exists to show us what doesn't work. remember Jeremiah? he preached the same message for 20 years . but it did nothing to help the situation.

 

[disciple1]

Dollarsbill the reason I didn't respond is we didn't seem to disagree that much.
I believe the entire law is summed up in a single command love your neighbor as yourself. Galatians chapter 5 verse 14

 

[dollarsbill]

I believe the entire law is summed up in a single command love your neighbor as yourself.

Maybe we agree?

 

[mark273]

The original post in this thread asked the question why people try to obey the law when it is not possible. I have tried to answer that question. However, when I have given an affirmative answer to that question from the Scripture I have been met with complaints that we are not under the law but under grace. But the question as the whether we are under the law is a different question, and frankly, I do not understand why it keeps coming up, when that is not the question that was asked.

I agree that Paul says we are not under the law. But as to the question about whether or not people could obey the law, I will say again what the Scripture says.

Deuteronomy 30:11 says that the law God gave the people was not too difficult for them.

2 Kings 18:6 says that Hezekiah kept the commands of the Lord.

And Luke 1:6 says that Zechariah and Elizabeth kept the commands of the Lord blamelessly.

Now when I have quoted these verses before, people simply said that only Jesus kept the law. Well, what do you do with these other three verses? Are you saying that they do not exist in your Bible? Am I quoting them incorrectly? Have you crossed them out in your Bible? They must be dealt with. They should not be ignored.

I know that Jesus was the only one without sin. My point is that the idea of "keeping the law" as it is used in Scripture does not mean being without sin. It means living by faith in relationship with God.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

The original post in this thread asked the question why people try to obey the law when it is not possible. I have tried to answer that question. However, when I have given an affirmative answer to that question from the Scripture I have been met with complaints that we are not under the law but under grace. But the question as the whether we are under the law is a different question, and frankly, I do not understand why it keeps coming up, when that is not the question that was asked.

I agree that Paul says we are not under the law. But as to the question about whether or not people could obey the law, I will say again what the Scripture says.

Deuteronomy 30:11 says that the law God gave the people was not too difficult for them.

2 Kings 18:6 says that Hezekiah kept the commands of the Lord.

And Luke 1:6 says that Zechariah and Elizabeth kept the commands of the Lord blamelessly.

Now when I have quoted these verses before, people simply said that only Jesus kept the law. Well, what do you do with these other three verses? Are you saying that they do not exist in your Bible? Am I quoting them incorrectly? Have you crossed them out in your Bible? They must be dealt with. They should not be ignored.

I know that Jesus was the only one without sin. My point is that the idea of "keeping the law" as it is used in Scripture does not mean being without sin. It means living by faith in relationship with God.

the passages you quoted do not apply because the age "of the proclamation of the law and the prophets" has passed . (Luke 16:16 & context)

The scripture has a geometry to it. weightier matters, and other newer factors that eclipse older ones.

 

[mark273]

the passages you quoted do not apply because the age "of the proclamation of the law and the prophets" has passed . (Luke 16:16 & context)

The scripture has a geometry to it. weightier matters, and other newer factors that eclipse older ones.

You're so funny. You did it again. I did not say anything about us being under the law or not, so Luke 16:16 does not relate. It is a wonderful verse. I like it a lot. It would be relevant if I were saying that we were under the law. I am not.

The verses I quoted say that Hezekiah, Zechariah, and Elizabeth kept the commandments of the Lord. That is all I am saying. The first post of this thread said it was not possible. I have showed two verses that say that at least three people other than Jesus did what he said was not possible.

Now please do not respond by saying that we are not under the law. Let's just say that after so many posts I am not expecting much.