Bible Discussion Thread

[Comment Removed]

I would also add that we can look to Christ Himself who apparently "broke" the Sabbath law by healing on the Sabbath; having Disciples eating grain and thus "doing work"; etc. ( Matt. 12:1). Jesus replied a few verses later that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath. Therefore Christ in His obedience did what He always did as a member of the Godhead; did all the works of the Father and of course as a man lived sinlessly. The one who created the Universe and was Divine Himself no doubt with the Father created the very laws themselves as well as all laws of physics in the universe. He could also do things such as desire and demand worship and be a jealous God as well as being able to hate perfectly and love that way as well. God's nature therfore is reflected in the law; and the lawless one (Satan) comes to remove all restraint.

So therefore to be free from the law we can choose to follow the Spirit or God forbid use it as a license to sin. ( Romans 6:1). That is what determines if we are truly free as a slave to Christ; or living what seems right to us but leads to death ( Prov. 14:12). Freedom is in following Christ and part of the New Covenant; but doesn't remove the universal laws affecting things such as murder and divorce and adultery (such as seen in Mark 6:18). This shows how even pagans are under covenant vow obligations. There are ceremonial laws and special O.T. laws specifically for Israel (which would cover the Sabbath Day requirement). That differentiation can help us understand things better; Jesus goes one step beyond with murder and adultery with the state of the heart. We also need to look at sins of omission as well as commission and how things affect others with a sort of ripple effect. Outer actions reflect the fruit of our inner most being; and whether we have a new heart or heart of stone

( Ezekiel 36:26).

Christ needs to Lord of all or He is not our Master; we must fall on the rock or be crushed ( Matt. 21:44).

Agape.

Richard,

You said many good things in which I agree and I would like to add my two cents to say that Freedom from the law, in actuality Frees us from being under Any obligation to follow Anything a man would make us to do! Just because a leader of my church doesn't understand something that God has Commanded me to do doesn't mean that I shouldn't obey God, on the contrary, I'm to forsake everything in this world for God! You mention freedom and then you limit freedom by putting restraints upon it by saying that freedom doesn't remove universal laws; and then you give examples by mentioning murder, divorce, and adultery. You see the conflict? The law was our schoolmaster ONLY until Christ came to give us The Holy Spirit! "But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed." Galatians 3:23 KJV "Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith." Galatians 3:24 KJV "But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster." Galatians 3:25 KJV "For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus." Galatians 3:26 KJV

Now, don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying to use your freedom to sin; but I am saying that no matter what God Commands, if He indeed does Command it, then He has made it holy! With that said; there are only four things (that I have noticed) that there is no provision for in the holy bible, 1) idolatry, 2) sexual immorality, 3)blaspheme against The Holy Spirit, and 4) hypocrisy. As far as I can tell these are things God will NEVER ask Anyone to do. But, just to give you pause in judgment, the conquering of Canaan was called for ONLY when GOD Himself came to Direct it Himself! " ( Joshua 5:13-15). For we can know that it was God because angels do not allow themselves to be worshipped.

Richard,

You stated: I would also add that we can look to Christ Himself who apparently "broke" the Sabbath law by healing on the Sabbath; having Disciples eating grain and thus "doing work"; etc.

John 15:10 "If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love."

Jesus is stating in John 15:10 that he kept His Fathers Commandments - which would include the Sabbath/4th commandment. So what you are stating is in direct conflict with the scripture.

If you read God's 4th Commandment Exodus 20:10 it is commanding us to refrain from our work, meaning refrain from our normal work, doing things to get us ahead/making money. The Pharisees and the Sadducees made the Sabbath into something that God never intended it to be, and Jesus straightened that out, he showed us what the Sabbath Day is really meant to be. Similar to showing us by His examples, what He meant by recieving water baptism, and how we receive the Holy Spirit etc.

I would be very careful telling others that Jesus broke the Sabbath, when He states in scripture that he kept all of His Fathers Commandments.

Happy Sabbath Day!

Sorry about the way I stated that..there were provisions; clearly when David and his companions ate the shewbread. This would be related to ceremonial law as to whether something was set apart for sacred or "profane" use (which simply would mean common usage). Since the Levites would eat the sacrifices after proper cooking and preparation it was set apart for God but eaten by men. Such would be the case with the Disciples. In the instance of ceremonial laws we also see provision in Numbers 9:10 of when men were unclean; they could celebrate Passover 7 days later. We see a change of that law clearly with the foods that Peter was commanded to rise up and eat ( Acts 10:13).

Anyway I'm not trying to cause more dissention here. In anything other than ceremonial laws the law still stands. The day of the Sabbath appears to not be something enforced under the New Covenant although some argue it is still to be Saturday; since Christ is Lord of the Sabbath I can certainly see Sunday now as a similar day of rest; although I don't think scripture allows us to force that on anyone. It is the motives of the heart as to healing and the Pharisees adding to what is considered "work" that makes Jews today say for instance that they can't work an elevator button on Saturday but walk up 10 flights of stairs.

I suppose I'll conclude saying that God did instigate the "New Covenant" and in some ways it varies from the "Old" one. One was for National Israel as a political and spiritual nation; the latter of course for the church grafted into the vine so to speak.

ONce in heaven; of course we can't sin but I'm sure elements of the law will be lived out as we have perfect love and perfect peace in the presence of a perfect God.

Agape; Rich P

Good Question Daruled, and welcome to this forum. I'll let others speak to your question for now. may you be blessed by those who reply to your question.

Hi Daruled. And welcome to these Discussion pages & hope you will enjoy fellowship with us around God's Word.

Your question would require a very long answer, beyond the scope of these pages, & you may have noticed that this matter is being presently addressed & does come up often here (because it is so important & often so misunderstood). So just a quick answer to your "quick question": when we read that the believer is 'freed, or delivered, from the Law' ( Romans 7:6), we should understand that to mean that the Law given to Israel has no more rule & binding on the one who is now 'IN Christ'.

So, those of Israel & of the Gentiles who have been saved by Christ's Blood, have entered into a New Covenant relationship (in His Blood), that not only abrogates that old Law that only revealed sin & ended in death ( Romans 7:9-11), but brings forth a New Law within this New Covenant that we are now to hear & obey. Where the Old Law written on stones demanded total obedience by one's own power or else face death, the New Law of the Spirit ( Romans 8:2) is now embedded deep in the believer, & now is given the Holy Spirit energized power to obey, not just a set of 10 Commandments, but all the Law of God. And this New Law covers every aspect of the believer's life, which means that God's Commands are no longer limited to a number, but the Spirit brings every thought, word or deed into the believer's spiritual view & applies conviction & understanding applicable to the individual.

So yes, the believer IN Christ, can never be "lawless", for if he is & seeks to live his life separate from the workings of God's Spirit in him, he should then question whether real salvation is his actual experience. And I would venture further to state, that a child of God, led of His Spirit in him, would hardly be able to go through his waking moments each day without regular testings & examinations by the All-searching, All-ministering Holy Spirit residing in him. Blessings.

[Comment Removed]

Thanks Daruled for your explanation. And of course, what you say is correct, seeing that Romans 7:12 clearly tells us, "Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good." There was absolutely nothing wrong with the Words of that Holy Law given to Israel from the Mouth of God.

You've stated that my use of the word 'abrogation' isn't correct, rather you "look for the maturation of the old thing" (i.e. the Law). In one sense, I do agree to what you've stated that the old, through the gift Holy Spirit, has 'matured' into a New Law now applicable to the Saint. However, the way I look at the Old Law, hence my writing of its abrogation (abolishment), is that the Law was bound to the Old Covenant (there could be no separation at all). If a Jew continued to follow the words & compulsions of the Law, he was still under the Old Covenant & under it he would be judged. But under the New Covenant in Christ's Blood, the Old Covenant has been abolished with its requirements for rigid obedience to the Law that was intrinsic to it, with its resulting judgements. The Law that only led to death had to be abolished so that the Law that gives life ( Romans 8:2) might be established. The two could never be fused together.

So why are we seeing this differently? I agree to the Words of the Law given to Israel are everlasting & those words can certainly be applied under the New Covenant. Yet, it's not just the Words themselves, but the nature of the Old Covenant that is in question. The Words might be similar & applicable, but since the New Covenant supersedes the Old, the Old can only give the believer in Christ a 'skeletal' view of what God now requires of His children. And this, the Old Law could never show Israel - but only after Jesus came & then under the New Covenant, the Spirit can reveal the full meaning, implications, & requirement of God for holy living, now accomplished in His Power alone. This the Old Law could never do, for it wasn't in its design.

Hello Chris, I thank you for your response for I love discourse about God and His ways. I'll start off by making a distinction, I didn't say that your use of the word "abrogation" was wrong, for you used it correctly (as far as it can be used correctly), but I said I don't believe in it, not because it can't used correctly, but because to believe in it, that is, to hold it as foundational to faith leads to a veering from the way of God. For example: to believe in abrogation of the law is to contradict Matt.5:18 and I cannot believe that there is one contradiction in The Holy Bible. So as a way to remain safely within bounds of scripture I have thrown out the concept of abrogation, and instead use the concept of "maturation".

Now, you mentioned Jews that are under the old covenant and would be judged accordingly to show that under the old covenant there is no forgiveness for sin, only judgement; for forgiveness is Only with Christ not the letter of the law. I understand the point you are making, yet I point out that what you are actually pointing out is something else; Jews that believe in the letter of the law rather than Christ are under a curse and that curse is for our riches for they are "cut off" that we might be "grafted in".(please read Rom. Ch.11) So, what the Jews believe (the law) is not abrogated, but matured into The Spirit, that is, The Holy Spirit. So the Jews are wrong, yet they are wrong because God made them to be wrong, for our sake! For God Chose them for election, and a great thing about Election is that Election doesn't require any action from the elected, ONLY the act of God choosing! You see, there are two types of elect 1)the elect that are elect because God Chose them before the foundation of the world and, 2)the elect that are elected because The Elect are "cut off". So, to say that the two could never be fused together isn't correct because the elect are attached to The Elect

Page 1.

Thanks for your explanation of 'abrogation' Daruled. Though I understand what you're writing, I still can't see how if 'you don't believe in it' (i.e. in this instance by my use of it), yet I can still "use it correctly". Therefore, Matthew 5:18 as you quoted, is of no problem to me as I read that Jesus was born "under the Law ( Galatians 4:4), to redeem them that were under the law" ( Galatians 4:5). He came as a Jew, abiding by the Laws & all the ceremonial requirements, as the Old Covenant was still in force. And as He said, "I am not come to destroy (the Law), but to fulfil"; His purpose was not to remove the Law but to fulfil its demands perfectly (and so He did in His Life & in His Death). He could not be accused to have broken any Law, even though the religious leaders had much to accuse Him of according to their interpretations & inclusions within the Law. They might even have thought of this Man, with this new teaching, as an opponent to 'their brand' of Laws & thus undermining their hypocritical regime. But Jesus said that the true Law's destruction wasn't His purpose of coming.

But when the Work at the Cross was fully accomplished, the Law that once only led to death giving no hope, was nailed to the Cross ( Colossians 2:14), thus bringing an end to both it & the Old Covenant under which it was enshrined. To Page 2.

Chris,

Please understand me, when I say that I don't believe in abrogation I'm not saying that it doesn't exist I'm saying that I refuse to partake in it. For example: I don't believe in walking on high wires with no safety net, that doesn't mean that there aren't people who don't do so, it simply means that I won't do it. Truthfully, in my mind abrogation is the same thing as "walking on a high wire without a safety net", it doesn't mean that it can't be done, it simply means that I won't ever do so.

You also mention The Old Covenant and how it was "done away". "In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away." Hebrews 8:13 KJV Let me point out that many people misunderstand the meaning of this passage. God speaks of the First Covenant as "old" and is "ready to vanish away" yet, it isn't "abrogated" it is more like childhood. I'll explain: as adults we were once children, but now we are to "put away" childish things for as we have matured, childish things are done away with. Yet, who we are now depends upon who we were as children! What I'm saying is that the lessons we learned as children "shaped" who we are today as adults. So, it's not that our childhood vanished, it's that our experiences as children "set the tone" for who we are now. The same for The First Covenant, for it is done away with, yet "The Echo" of it will resound throughout all Eternity. So Christ did Fulfill the law, yet "fulfill" in this case is likened to matured (into adulthood).

Also, you mention Jews under the law, but remember they are "cut off" for our sake Rom. Ch 11 the Jews for the Gentiles, the vessels of wrath for the vessels of honor, and Christ for the world. This is a Pattern that God has implemented throughout all of history! The Jews are under Election and what that means is that action isn't required of them (faith), only God Choosing them.

Page 1.

Thank you Daruled for your explanation of 'abrogation' & how you understand the word in this context.

But to the "old ready to vanish away" & your illustration of 'putting away childish things as we mature'; I can see that those things can indeed 'shape us to who we are today as adults', but in the context of Scripture, I have two problems with this: this would certainly be the case with Israel who were given the Law, & hopefully with the help of the Holy Spirit when some would be saved (e.g. Saul, the disciples), that Law would have been more meaningful to them in their spiritual transition. What then happens to those "who have not the Law", how would that Law which they knew nothing about, nor ever given, shape them?

And secondly, we are 'to put away childish things as we mature'. I see 'putting away' as an abrogation of those things - if not, then it would not be unreasonable for me to go back to my 'box of toys' (as an adult) to begin playing with them. And I would think that anyone witnessing this behavior, would begin to have serious doubts about my mental & emotional state. I therefore see, that this 'putting away', is a 'casting away entirely', for the Law under the Old Covenant has nothing to do with those under the Spirit-given Law, the New Covenant; i.e. I simply cannot put my hand back into my toy box to even pull out that favorite toy - I can glance into the 'box' now & then, & see what I was before as a child (under the Law), but I should be careful not to 'toy' with its contents. Onto Page 2.

Page 2.

And yes, the 'Jew is under Electionrequiring only faith'. And so it was pre-Cross, as many from the Elect (of Israel) were accounted righteous & faithful, the blood of the Cross being applied to them, cleansing & justifying them before God. But after Jesus paid the price for our sin, even the Elect (of Israel) & those of the Gentiles now in Christ, are joined together as the Elect of God. Many of the Jews were "cut off" & the Gentiles were engrafted into the tree, but they were "broken offbecause of unbelief", not just to make room for Gentiles. The fact that they were removed means that we could be partakers of those blessings and "many sons might be brought unto glory" ( Hebrews 2:10).

This conversation has been good Daruled, but I will generally be offline for the next few weeks, so please excuse my absence. Blessings.

Page 2.

Re: Romans 11. Here too, I understand this passage differently. True, unbelieving Jews under the Law are also "under the curse" ( Galatians 3:10,11). And if they continued to place themselves under the Law, when that Law under that Covenant no longer existed (or, had become invalid), then they were doomed & cut out of the olive tree. There were still Jews that became believers ( Romans 11:5,7: the elect (Jews) had obtained salvation, along with the Gentiles who believed (also now the elect of God) & subsequently engrafted into the tree ( Romans 11:17-21)). So I believe that those who would not believe, received 'the spirit of blindness, deafness & slumber', but only temporary (v11), hopefully to be "provoked to jealousy", seeing the Gentiles have embraced the Messiah Whom they rejected & crucified.

But if the Law only 'matured', now to be embraced under the New Covenant, then the bindings & judgements of that Law must still weigh upon those in Christ. I see that there is more to the Old Law, than just a set of holy Commandments to be obeyed. It has to be cast off so that the one in Christ can truly come under the liberty & power that the Spirit gives. So the apostle could exclaim that he was now free from the law of sin & death, embracing the Law of the life-giving Spirit. If the old Law only 'matured' into the New, the full value of the New Covenant may be understood to be diminished.

And re: "fused together", I wasn't referring to the elect being fused together, but to the Law that was given under the Old Covenant to the Law under the New Covenant. But when the elect of Israel turn to the Lord, not only will the veil be taken away ( 2 Corinthians 3:16), but we, together with them can enjoy liberty in obedience to Christ; and particularly for the Jew, I would think that the transition would truly be liberating, giving the certainty & joy that the Law denied them. And we can see the emotion of Paul in his dealing with this subject in his letters.