The Law of God in the NT - What is it?

[Aaron]

The Law of God is the Law. It is all still in effect.

 

[Aaron]

In Romans 7 Paul speaks of the Law of God then quotes from it - showing that it is the Ten Commandments.

When he quotes from the law to establish a minister's right for compensation, he quotes from a statute regarding oxen saying it wasn't for oxen that God commanded it, but for those who labor in the Gospel.

 

[Aaron]

Good response, BobRyan.

If the Jerusalem Council, in their charge to Paul, wanted the gentile Christians to observe the 10 words of the Mosaic Covenant it could have been included in less than 10 words. The Jerusalem Council knew that the Mosaic Covenant was never meant for gentiles in Hoboken.

For example, the command about honoring parents - the payoff was that the person would "live long in the land." What land? Brooklyn?

Paul quoted the Fifth Commandment to converted Gentiles in Ephesus, and affirmed the promise.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Marcia: The point of the quote in Rom. 2 above is that yes, hypothetically people who do the law would be justified but then Paul goes on in Romans to show that nobody can do this! In fact, it is his whole argument, also in Galatians. God always knew no one could keep the law.

HP: Simply untrue.

Marcia: The Law is good because it reflects the character of God and shines a light on our own sinfulness (see Rom 7 where Paul discusses this).

HP: Yes, it does indeed shine a light where there is sin, but you cannot conclude all have sin to have that light shown on, present tense. Romans 7 is all about Paul before he was saved as convicted sinner and NOT about the walk of a believer or his own walk subsequent to his salvation experience.

Marcia: The Law is the standard of the character of God, something man cannot keep or achieve.

HP: Completely untrue. If that was true God would be entirely unjust to place a standard, infractions thereof punishable by eternal damnation, that no one could in reality reach. That paints a horrible blight of the Justice of God’s character, and is no where supported in Scripture.

Marcia: These verses (I also posted in the other thread) clearly show that we cannot keep the law and if we could, then Christ died in vain.

...for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly. Gal. 2:21

Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, "THE RIGHTEOUS MAN SHALL LIVE BY FAITH." Gal 3:11

Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. Gal. 3:24

You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. Gal. 5:4

HP: They teach no such thing as you assume. Certainly once we have sinned righteousness does not come through the keeping of the law, but once the righteousness of Christ has covered sins that are past, indeed our subsequent obedience to the law is justly considered as righteousness, without which we shall not see God.

Marcia: I think the SDA teaches you can keep the law, but the Bible says you can't.

HP: Many Churches teach one can keep God’s law in accordance to Scripture. I would say ONLY those clearly Calvinistic or ‘leaning hard towards Calvinism’ would take the position you are assuming.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Ro 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

It appears that some try and separate fulfilling the ‘righteousness of the law’ from keeping the law itself, as if though one might fulfill the righteousness of the law while forming intents in opposition to the law. No one can fulfill the righteousness of Gods moral law while forming intents in opposition to the moral law itself, the moral law having its most basic codification expressed in the ten commandments.

Christ held firmly to compliance to the ten commandments and even strengthened them for believers, showing that merely keeping them on the outside to the letter of the law was not all that is required of us as believers, but rather that we must also keep the spirit of the law as well in a spirit of love towards God and not simply some duty to grudgingly perform.

 

[billwald]

>Paul quoted the Fifth Commandment to converted Gentiles in Ephesus, and affirmed the promise.

Then a Christian can add years to his lifespan by emigrating to Israel?

 

[BobRyan]

When he quotes from the law to establish a minister's right for compensation, he quotes from a statute regarding oxen saying it wasn't for oxen that God commanded it, but for those who labor in the Gospel.

It is not my intent to claim that the NT writers were telling saints that all of scripture had been deleted except for the Ten Commandments.

I agree that the O.T text is quoted heavily in the NT and not just the Ten Commandments.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

>Paul quoted the Fifth Commandment to converted Gentiles in Ephesus, and affirmed the promise.

Then a Christian can add years to his lifespan by emigrating to Israel?

Then the "land promised" is "The City whose builder and maker is God" Heb 11 - for which Abraham sought - rather than seeking earthly holdings in a sinful world.

In any case - Paul affirms the continued authority of that "unit" of Ten in which the 5th commandment "is the first commandment with a promise" Eph 6:2. That observation of Paul only works if you limit the context for his Eph 6:2 to what scripture calls "The TEN commandments"

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Marcia]

1. There is no place where the Bible says a born-again Christian cannot keep the Law of God - - no not even "one".

2. There ARE texts showing that the saints DO "KEEP the commandments of God" Rev 14:12 and that "What MATTERS is keeping the Commandments of God" 1Cor 7:19.

in fact the same author that tells us the saints are those who "KEEP the Commandments of God" Rev 14:12 is the one that tells us that if we DO NOT Keep His Commandments and yet CLAIM to be one of the saints - we are not telling the truth 1John 2:4.

You are free to call these texts "Seventh-day Adventist" if you like - but they were written long before the Seventh-day Adventist church came along.

Christ said that He did not come with the mission of ending the Law of God - but rather He came to perfectly comply with it (Matt 5:17 -- after it -- God's WORD is Law.


John says that "SIN is (by definition) transgression of the Law" 1John 3:4

Paul says that the LAW defines SIN Rom 7:7

Paul says that the one who claims they cannot stop rebelling against God's Law (are enslaved to sin) and are not going to get eternal life. Rom 6:16

Thus your "saints must sin" and "saints cannot keep God's Law" idea - only fits one of these scenarios actually found in scripture.

And yet the bible says that if men could be made righteous by the law, then Christ died needlessly.

Of course, believers, regenerated by the Holy Spirit, will have their desires changed over time and should want to please God, which means they will allow the convictions by the Holy Spirit to steer them into a life that is in conformity to the life of Christ, but no one can ever achieve a perfect obedience of the law.

I think we should think about what is the purpose of these commandments. It's not to make a checklist and then be proud of mastering anything; the commandments reflect the character of God, and the Holy Spirit is conforming us into the image of Christ, so therefore, as one allows the HS to do His work and yields to the HS, he/she conforms more and more to the image of Christ. Then one wants to keep the commandments and is more able to resist sin.

If one is only woodenly or legalistically trying to obey the commandments, which is what I think is the result of the SDA and other legalistic entities, then there is no point to it.

And the most important thing is that however well one keeps the laws/commandments, one has been justified by faith at salvation - that is, declared righteous by God - and has eternal life. I do not think the SDA teaches this.

 

[Marcia]

Actually Paul is very careful in Romans 2 to show BOTH the succeeding cases AND the failing cases. And after doing that he zeros in on an "extreme successful case" where he takes a gentile with no access to scripture at all and shows that even THEY succeed "showing the works of the Law WRITTEN on the heart".

But that does not mean the Gentile is following the law! It only means that the Gentile's conscience shows that all have a sense of right and wrong. This is one evidence of a Creator.

Paul affirms in Romans 2 that the gentiles who walk in obedience to God's Law are counted as real Jews - while those Jews who happen to be in rebellion against God (so that would NOT be Jews like Paul, or Timothy, or Peter or Barnabus or the Heb 11 list or ...) are just as lost as any lost gentile.

He is saying that those who try to be righteous by the law will fail - this is said in a few places in the NT - I posted at least one of these statements.

 

[Marcia]

Yes, it does indeed shine a light where there is sin, but you cannot conclude all have sin to have that light shown on, present tense. Romans 7 is all about Paul before he was saved as convicted sinner and NOT about the walk of a believer or his own walk subsequent to his salvation experience.

I have actually argued for the above view, that Rom. 7 is about the unregenerate state. However, the other view also has good points. But we can go to other scripture to show that believers sin.

HP: Completely untrue. If that was true God would be entirely unjust to place a standard, infractions thereof punishable by eternal damnation, that no one could in reality reach. That paints a horrible blight of the Justice of God’s character, and is no where supported in Scripture.

You disagree that the commandments reflect the character of God?? Of course they do. They were given by God. And they were given, as it says in Galatians, as "tutor" to lead us to Christ. How? Because when man realizes he cannot obey these commandments, that he cannot be as good as God, he realizes he needs Jesus because there is nothing man can do to earn salvation by works. Also, the law shows the person his sin; many have come to Christ by realizing that they cannot be as good as God. This is not how I came to Christ, but many have.

They teach no such thing as you assume. Certainly once we have sinned righteousness does not come through the keeping of the law, but once the righteousness of Christ has covered sins that are past, indeed our subsequent obedience to the law is justly considered as righteousness, without which we shall not see God.

I bolded and underlined your incredible statement above. If you believe this, then you are rejecting the plain teaching of scripture, HP. Those verses are as clear as crystal. If you think that one must obey the law to be saved, then it means that you think the atonement of Christ was insufficient to pay for the penalty of sins.

Many of the verses used to say what you are saying are actually teaching about rewards or loss of rewards for believers, not loss of salvation. But I know you believe one can lose his salvation, and I'm done arguing that with you. It gets nowhere.

HP: Many Churches teach one can keep God’s law in accordance to Scripture. I would say ONLY those clearly Calvinistic or ‘leaning hard towards Calvinism’ would take the position you are assuming.

I know of the holiness churches that teach one can keep the law (Methodist, Nazarene, Pentecostal) and I strongly disagree that this view is scripturally supported. I am not a Calvinist at all, never have been. It's a sore point with many Calvinists who know me.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Marcia: If you think that one must obey the law to be saved, then it means that you think the atonement of Christ was insufficient to pay for the penalty of sins.

HP: No it does not. It simply means I believe the notion of the literal payment theory you espouse (a notion clearly supported by Calvinistic dogma) is unscriptural, illogical, and as such a false notion unsupported by Scripture or reason.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Marcia, while you are mentioning things that are ' incredible' to you,
let me make yet another statement for you to consider.

If one claims to be born again and obedience (righteousness) is not a subsequent result, such a one is deceived as to their standing before God.

1Jo 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

 

[Aaron]

It is not my intent to claim that the NT writers were telling saints that all of scripture had been deleted except for the Ten Commandments.

I agree that the O.T text is quoted heavily in the NT and not just the Ten Commandments.

in Christ,

Bob

Not merely quoted, but appealed to as authority.

 

[Marcia]

HP: No it does not. It simply means I believe the notion of the literal payment theory you espouse (a notion clearly supported by Calvinistic dogma) is unscriptural, illogical, and as such a false notion unsupported by Scripture or reason.

I am not a Calvinist! Good grief.

What do you mean by the "literal payment theory?"

 

[Marcia]

Marcia, while you are mentioning things that are ' incredible' to you,
let me make yet another statement for you to consider.

If one claims to be born again and obedience (righteousness) is not a subsequent result, such a one is deceived as to their standing before God.

1Jo 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

Did you read my post where I addressed obedience? It was rather long for me. I see no reason to repeat it.

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by BobRyan
It is not my intent to claim that the NT writers were telling saints that all of scripture had been deleted except for the Ten Commandments.

I agree that the O.T text is quoted heavily in the NT and not just the Ten Commandments.

Not merely quoted, but appealed to as authority.

Agreed.

Why would I be inclined to differ with that??

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Actually Paul is very careful in Romans 2 to show BOTH the succeeding cases AND the failing cases. And after doing that he zeros in on an "extreme successful case" where he takes a gentile with no access to scripture at all and shows that even THEY succeed "showing the works of the Law WRITTEN on the heart".

Paul affirms in Romans 2 that the gentiles who walk in obedience to God's Law are counted as real Jews - while those Jews who happen to be in rebellion against God (so that would NOT be Jews like Paul, or Timothy, or Peter or Barnabus or the Heb 11 list or ...) are just as lost as any lost gentile.

But that does not mean the Gentile is following the law! It only means that the Gentile's conscience shows that all have a sense of right and wrong. This is one evidence of a Creator.

He is saying that those who try to be righteous by the law will fail - this is said in a few places in the NT - I posted at least one of these statements.

To make the text say that - we would have to re-write it something like this "Both Jews and Gentiles are failing to obey God and both are going to hell". Which would be the LOST state of Jew and Gentile BEFORE being "led to repentance" before being born-again and forgiven.

So the question is - does Romans 2 only deal with the LOST state - apart from Gospel transformation, Gospel repentance, living the life of the Christian who is no longer "slave" to sin (Rom 6)?

As an exercise for the reader -- take a look at this core section of Romans 2 --

1. Do you see "Gospel" mentioned here?
2. Do you see "repentance" mentioned here?
3. Do you see "just Jews condemned" here?
4. Do you see "just Gentiles" getting eternal life here?
5. Does God say he is partial to Gentile or Jew here?
6. Do you see a future judgment mentioned here?
7. Do you find it to be based on works?? DOERS of the LAW?
8. Is “Justification” mentioned here in the context of the very “Gospel” that Paul preached?

Success cases in Rom 2: 7-13, 13-16 25-28

Rom2:
7 to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life;
8 but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.
9 There will be [b]tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil[/b], of the Jew first and also of the Greek,
10 but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
11 For there is no partiality with God.

25 for indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision.
26 so if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?
27and he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law?
28 for he is not a Jew who is one outwardly,

more...

 

[BobRyan]

Do you see Gospel repentance as the starting context for Romans 2?

Rom 2
4 Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance?


5 But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the [b]righteous judgment of God,
6 who WILL RENDER TO EACH PERSON ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS: [/b]



Do you see Gospel Perseverance of the saints as the opening context for Romans 2?

7 to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life;
8 but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.

Do you see reference to God’s Law as “doing good” and reference to the impartial nature of God’s Gospel rule?

9 There will be [b]tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil[/b], of the Jew first and also of the Greek,
10 but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
11 For there is no partiality with God.
12 For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law;
13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.


Do you see the extreme example of “successful gentiles” passing the test of God’s Gospel rule in the future Gospel Judgment?

14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves,
15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,
16 on the day when, according to my GOSPEL, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.
11 For there is no partiality with God.
…
25 for indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision.
26 so if the uncircumcised mankeeps the requirementsof the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?

 

[steaver]

The "proof" in your argument is not from scripture - it is from what you see around you. The argument you make is that while the Bible does not state "you will continue to fail" or "you must continue to fail" or "here is THE sin you must continue to commit from time to time" -- yet because we see Christian fail around us - we are free to invent that as some kind of infallible divine doctrine.

I draw the line at that point.

in Christ,

Bob

How about just examining your ownself? I already said that I have failed and many times. Have you failed to keep a commandment since your rebirth?

:jesus: