Defining "the law" as used in New Testament

[Dr. Walter]

"The law" refers to what is written in the conscience of all mankind beginning with Adam, later expanded by Moses in the Ten Commandments further written in the civil and ceremonial laws and thus ultimately what is known as the "old Covenant" which is expounded upon by Moses and the prophets and is the primary reference in the Penteteuch, historical, poetical and prophetical books of the Old Testament thus giving the complete Old Testament Scriptures at times the designation as "the law".

The phrases "deeds of the law" or "works of the law" refers to the obedience of the moral laws written upon human conscience, further written upon stone in the ten commandments and further written and expanded in the civil and ceremonial laws as expounded by Moses and the Prophets.

It is easy to demonstrate the above definitions in reference to the doctrine of justification in the New Testament.

1. The same question given to Jesus concerning what to do in order to inherit eternal life by the Scribe in Luke 10:25-28 and in Matthew 19:17-28 to the Rich Young ruler is the law. In the former Deuteronomy 6 is the proper response while in the latter the ten commandments are specifically referred to by Christ.

2. In Romans 7:1-7 the ten commandments are referred to as the law Paul was formerly under and the tenth commandment "thou shalt not covet" is specifically referred to.

3. In Romans 2:13 the law that justifies in the day of judgement is the law the Jews boasted in - Romans 2:17. This is the same law the Jews boasted in for justification in Galatians 3:10-13.

4. It is this law or the law that has the ten commandments as its basis that is done away with in Christ and is opposed or not "of faith" in Galatians 3:12 and opposed to faith in Romans 4:5 "worketh not BUT believeth."

CONCLUSION: The Ten commandments is the basis for Jewish law and justification by faith in Christ is contrasted to justification in the sight of God by keeping the ten commandments inclusive of all its applications (civil, ceremonial).

 

[Andre]

"The law" refers to what is written in the conscience of all mankind beginning with Adam, later expanded by Moses in the Ten Commandments further written in the civil and ceremonial laws and thus ultimately what is known as the "old Covenant" which is expounded upon by Moses and the prophets and is the primary reference in the Penteteuch, historical, poetical and prophetical books of the Old Testament thus giving the complete Old Testament Scriptures at times the designation as "the law".

The phrases "deeds of the law" or "works of the law" refers to the obedience of the moral laws written upon human conscience, further written upon stone in the ten commandments and further written and expanded in the civil and ceremonial laws as expounded by Moses and the Prophets.

Paul does not share quite this view. When he refers to the "law", he is generally (although not always) referring very specifically to the Jewish Law - the Law of Moses. When Paul uses the term "law" in this sense, he is not talking about any kind of universal moral code available to all people.

One example of this is Romans 3:27-28 in the NASB:

27Where then is boasting? It is excluded By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. 28For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.

What are these works of the Law that Paul thinks cannot justify? Are they “good works” in general, or are they the practices or “works” of the Torah, the Law of Moses?

Paul is clearly talking about the Torah here, and not “good works”. And so the “boast” here (verse 27) is not the boast of the person who thinks he can climb to heaven by a ladder of good works, it is instead the boast of the Jew, who thinks that following Torah will justify him.

That this is the case is borne out by verse 29, a verse which makes no sense if "good works" or a "or obedience to a general law" are in view in verse 28, but makes perfect sense if the works of Torah are what Paul is talking about:

29Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too,

Paul is amplifying the implications of verse 27 and 28 and is clearly focusing on how the Jew and Gentile are both members of God’s family. In verses 27 and 28, he has written that “works” do not justify. In verse 29, it becomes clear that these are the works of Torah since, obviously, it is by doing the works of Torah that the Jew could boast "God is God of the Jews only". What marks out the nation Israel from the Gentile? Possession and doing of Torah, of course. Not good works.

 

[Dr. Walter]

27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:
30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.
31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.


Throughout Romans, Galatians and Ephesians there are two options that are always contrasted with each other; As such they are two opposing laws. It is the contrast between what you "DO" or personal obedience to the law of God thus the "works" or "deeds" of the law versus what Christ 's obedience to the same law of God in the place of sinners appropriated by imputation through faith.

This is exactly what Christ referred to in Luke 10:25-28 with scribe - which is all about PERSONAL OBEDIENCE TO THE LAW OF GOD - "what shall I DO". This is exactly what Christ referred to in Matthew 19:17-25 with the Ruler "what shall I DO?" (deeds of the law, works of the law, personal obedience to keeping THE LAW OF GOD spelled out in the ten commandment). This is exactly what Paul refers to in Romans 2:17 and Galatians 3:10-13 - PERSONAL OBEDIENCE TO THE LAW OF GOD versus SUBSTITUTIONARY OBEDIENCE TO THE LAW OF GOD.

In the preceding context of Romans 3:27-30 the law of faith or justification by faith in Christ's provision to satisfy the law of God has been set forth in terms that deny boasting - "freely by his grace" "faith in His blood" and whosoever "believeth in him."

This opens the question about boasting, Which excludes boasting? Personal obedience to God's law or Substitionary obedience by Christ to God's law. The law of "WORKS" or the law of "FAITH"? This is the same contrast throughout Romans and Galatians and Ephesians. The law of faith has already been defined in verses 24-26. The law of works is defined in verse 28 or how Jews (Scribe in Luke; Ruler in Matthew; Jews in Romans 2:17-29; Jews in Gal. 3:10-13) believed justification in the sight of God was obtained by personal obedience to God's Law

Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. - Rom. 3:28

If Paul did not make this conclusion in verse 28 he would have restricted God to the Jews and their justification by law keeping as only the Jews had the Law of God. Therefore he asks the next logical question:

Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: - v. 29

If he is the God of the gentiles than justification cannot be by personal obedience to the law of God or law keeping but must be by faith and faith alone in the substitutionary obedience by Christ to the same law of God appropriated to Gentiles by imputation through faith. If not, then he could not be the God of the Gentiles as they are without the Law of God. So Paul concludes with these words:


Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. - v. 29

Without circumcision means without personal obedience to a life of law keeping as circumcision was the first act of committment to a LIFE of law keeping.

However, the law of faith does not do away with the Law of God. Indeed it is the only way it is established by God through the PERSONAL OBEDIENCE OF CHRIST in behalf of His people and then appropriated by imputation through faith.

"The law" in Matthew 19:16-25 is the moral law of God written upon the concience of men but delievered only to the Jews upon stone tablets, which form the basis for the whole Mosaic law system that the Jews believed they must "DO" in order to be justified in God's sight. It is the same law mentioned by Christ in Luke 10:25-28 with the scribe, the same law mentioned by Christ in Matthew 19:16-25 with the Ruler, the same law in Romans 2:13 mentioned by Paul as the standard of judgement in the last day with the Jews, the same law mentioned by Paul in Galatians 3:10-13 that is always in direct contrast with faith in Christ.

Absolute proof you are wrong is that the faith referred to in Romans 4:5 obtains righteousness by imputation rather than by personal obedience to the Law of God or works. It is obtained apart from and before personal obedience to divine ordinances in Romans 4:9-12. It is obtained without the law in Romans 4:13-16 and it is obtained by grace through faith without personal assistance in Romans 4:16-21.

Absolute proof you are wrong is that in Romans 3:27 Paul only provides TWPTIONS that are CONTRASTED to each other and it is this same contrast made throughout the rest of Scripture. There is no THIRD or FOURTH option and that is exactly what your position requires.

Paul does not share quite this view. When he refers to the "law", he is generally (although not always) referring very specifically to the Jewish Law - the Law of Moses. When Paul uses the term "law" in this sense, he is not talking about any kind of universal moral code available to all people.

One example of this is Romans 3:27-28 in the NASB:

27Where then is boasting? It is excluded By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. 28For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.

What are these works of the Law that Paul thinks cannot justify? Are they “good works” in general, or are they the practices or “works” of the Torah, the Law of Moses?

Paul is clearly talking about the Torah here, and not “good works”. And so the “boast” here (verse 27) is not the boast of the person who thinks he can climb to heaven by a ladder of good works, it is instead the boast of the Jew, who thinks that following Torah will justify him.

That this is the case is borne out by verse 29, a verse which makes no sense if "good works" or a "or obedience to a general law" are in view in verse 28, but makes perfect sense if the works of Torah are what Paul is talking about:

29Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too,

Paul is amplifying the implications of verse 27 and 28 and is clearly focusing on how the Jew and Gentile are both members of God’s family. In verses 27 and 28, he has written that “works” do not justify. In verse 29, it becomes clear that these are the works of Torah since, obviously, it is by doing the works of Torah that the Jew could boast "God is God of the Jews only". What marks out the nation Israel from the Gentile? Possession and doing of Torah, of course. Not good works.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Only Two opposing Options

Throughout the New Testament there are only TWO opposing options for justification in the sight of God.

1. Jesus spoke of TWO opposing ways - Mt. 7:13-14
2. Paul gave only TWO opposing laws - law of faith versus law of works - Rom. 3:27
3. Paul spoke of two options - "grace" versus "works" - Rom. 11:6; Eph. 2:8-9

The option of "works" is always in connection with the Law of God and the
key word is "do"

The option of "grace" is always in connection with "faith"

4. The "law" that is connected with works is the Law of God as written upon the conscience of men, upon the tablets of stone and as expressed in civil and ceremonial laws of Moses.

5. There are no THIRD options and thus no THIRD kind of law or "works" or "deeds".

 

[Dr. Walter]

When Paul uses the term "law" in this sense, he is not talking about any kind of universal moral code available to all people.[/FONT]

The moral law of God is written in PRINCIPLE universally upon the conscious of men. The same moral law is written in PRECEPTS upon tablets given to Israel. The same moral law is the BASIS for application of the civil and ceremonial laws of Israel which together consist as the Old Covenant.

Hence, it is the MORAL LAW of God that reflects the righteous standard of God in principle, precepts and applications. The "works" or "deeds" of mankind are judged in the LIGHT of this law:

For when the Gentiles, which have not the [written] law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the [written]law, are a law unto themselves. Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another
:

On judgement day, God will judge the gentile and the Jew according to the SAME law written upon the heart or stone.

It is this law that Christ fulfilled by his own personal obedience and abolished as a means to be justified in the sight of God for those who trust in His satisfaction.

 

[BobRyan]

"The law" refers to what is written in the conscience of all mankind beginning with Adam, later expanded by Moses in the Ten Commandments

That much is true.

But it also includes that which is not written in the Ten Commandments such as
Lev 19:18 - love your neighbor as yourself
Deut 6:5 - Love God with all of your heart

These laws are "Written on the heart and mind" (Heb 8:10) according to the Gospel New Covenant first found in Deut 6:6, Ps 37:31, Ezek 36:26-27, Deut 30:6, Jer 31:31-33...

further written in the civil and ceremonial laws

The civil laws had to do with legal inforcement under a theocracy.

No more theocracy - no more legal inforcement specific to a theocracy.

The ceremonial laws had to do with the sacrificial system pointint forward to the Messiah.

and thus ultimately what is known as the "old Covenant"

The old covenant is sometimes a reference to the ceremonial system (Heb 9:1-3) and at other times is used to reference the rule or condition for the lost "Obey and Live" 2Cor 3:3-16.

By contrast the New Covenant was the law of the Spirit in the OT - the way of Life - (also stated in 2Cor 3) and is the ONE Gospel as mentioned in Gal 1:6-11 by which the saints - the people of faith listed in Heb 11 - were fully accepted by God.

The phrases "deeds of the law" or "works of the law" refers to the obedience of the moral laws

Paul uses the phrase explicitly to speak to "works without faith" as we see in Romans 3:20 - no justification at all is possible. And as Gal 3:21 points out works of the law apart from faith - does not bring salvation of any sort - no not even of the Heb 11 OT sort.

In fact in Romans 8:5-8 Paul states that the unsaved not only "do not" obey God's Law - but they "cannot" obey the law of God.



Rom 8
5 For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit.
6 For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace,
7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the Law of God, for it is not even able to do so,
8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

1. The same question given to Jesus concerning what to do in order to inherit eternal life by the Scribe in Luke 10:25-28 and in Matthew 19:17-28 to the Rich Young ruler is the law. In the former Deuteronomy 6 is the proper response while in the latter the ten commandments are specifically referred to by Christ.

Jesus said of His own pre-cross teaching "THIS Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached in all the World and THEN shall the end come" - Matt 24:14

Emphasizing that point - after the cross Jesus gives the great commission

"GO therefore and make DISCIPLES of all nations..TEACHING them to OBSERVE ALL that I Commanded you" Matt 28:19-20

Which is exactly what Matthew is doing more than a decade after Christ's resurrection - when he writes "the book of Matthew".

The NT followers took that order seriously - thus we have FOUR Gospels.

2. In Romans 7:1-7 the ten commandments are referred to as the law

That much is true.

Rom 7
7 What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, "" YOU SHALL NOT COVET.''
8 But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead.
9 I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died;
10 and this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me;
11 for sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me.
12 So then, the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.
13 Therefore did that which is good become a cause of death for me? May it never be! Rather it was sin, in order that it might be shown to be sin by effecting my death through that which is good, so that through the commandment sin would become utterly sinful.

But some have "imagined" that coveting is no longer a problem for the saints to worry about...

Paul was formerly under and the tenth commandment "thou shalt not covet" is specifically referred to.

And of course - that logic is transparently flawed as no NT author claims that coveting is NOT something NT saints should be concerned about.

Rather NT Authors uphold God's Law

"But what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1Cor 7:19

"Do we then make void the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we Establish the Law of God" Rom 3:31

1John 5

1Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him.
2By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and observe His commandments.
3For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome.

3. In Romans 2:13 the law that justifies in the day of judgement is the law the Jews boasted in - Romans 2:17.

That much is true - the Jews "imagined" they were Keeping God's Law.

As Paul points out in Phil 3:6 "As to the righteousness which is in the law - found blameless"

Even though Paul is clear on the point that "I was alive APART from the Law but when the commandment came - I died" Rom 7:9-10 showing that in his unsaved state he did not understand the real depth of God's Law.

For as Paul notes in Rom 8:5-7 above - the lost DO not keep God's Law and in fact they "cannot".

The same law written on "tablets of stone" and external under the Old Covenant condition of being "lost" and "condemend" - is written "on the heart" under the Gospel New Covenant condition of the saved saint (Heb 8:7-12).

And yet innexplicably - many teachers today "imagine" that the Law as referenced in Heb 8 and as is "in context" in Deut 6:6 - is some "other law" than God's Commandments.

4. It is this law or the law that has the ten commandments as its basis that is done away with in Christ

A direct contradiction of scripture which leads Paul to refute that imaginative story by saying -

"But what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1Cor 7:19

"Do we then make void the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we Establish the Law of God" Rom 3:31

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Since I mentioned the "ONE Gospel" of the New Covenant - in the post above --

Hebrews 8

8…behold, days are coming, says the Lord, when I will effect a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah;
9 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; for they did not continue in my covenant, and I did not care for them, says the Lord.
10 "" for this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the lord: I will put My laws into their minds, and I will write them on their hearts and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.
11 "" and they shall not teach everyone his fellow citizen, and everyone his brother, saying, "know the Lord,' for all will know Me, from the least to the greatest of them.
12 "" for I will be merciful to their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more.''

 

[BobRyan]

Paul does not share quite this view. When he refers to the "law", he is generally (although not always) referring very specifically to the Jewish Law - the Law of Moses.

That is true.

Paul relies heavily "on scripture" as it turns out. And Paul's readers had access to "scripture" as we see even in Acts 13 where both Jews and Gentiles are listening "to scripture" and in Acts 17:11 where gentiles are "studying the scriptures daily to SEE IF those things were so".

Context requires that when we see the Law of God - or the Commandments of God mentioned in Paul's text - that we use it in the context of saints who "had scripture" and who considered "scripture" to be authoritative.

When Paul uses the term "law" in this sense, he is not talking about any kind of universal moral code available to all people.

One example of this is Romans 3:27-28 in the NASB:

27Where then is boasting? It is excluded By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. 28For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.

What are these works of the Law that Paul thinks cannot justify? Are they “good works” in general, or are they the practices or “works” of the Torah, the Law of Moses?

Paul is clearly talking about the Torah here, and not “good works”. And so the “boast” here (verse 27) is not the boast of the person who thinks he can climb to heaven by a ladder of good works, it is instead the boast of the Jew, who thinks that following Torah will justify him.

Correct. There is only one source for God's Law - "THE Law" and that is scripture. So Paul is talking about those who seek salvation through the Law instead of admitting to sin and accepting Christ - who then provides the New Birth - which has that same external law - "written on the mind and heart" Heb 8:10.

That this is the case is borne out by verse 29, a verse which makes no sense if "good works" or a "or obedience to a general law" are in view in verse 28, but makes perfect sense if the works of Torah are what Paul is talking about:

29Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too,

Paul is amplifying the implications of verse 27 and 28 and is clearly focusing on how the Jew and Gentile are both members of God’s family.

Correct.

In verses 27 and 28, he has written that “works” do not justify. In verse 29, it becomes clear that these are the works of Torah since, obviously, it is by doing the works of Torah that the Jew could boast "God is God of the Jews only". .

True.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Dr. Walter]

The civil laws had to do with legal inforcement under a theocracy.

No more theocracy - no more legal inforcement specific to a theocracy.

The ceremonial laws had to do with the sacrificial system pointint forward to the Messiah.

A direct contradiction of scripture which leads Paul to refute that imaginative story by saying -

"But what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1Cor 7:19

"Do we then make void the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we Establish the Law of God" Rom 3:31

The civil law and ceremonial law are nothing more than the moral law expressed in civil life and in symbolism.

The whole Mosaic system of law (moral, civil, ceremonial) is abolished as well as the law written upon the conscience of men is abolished in regard to PERSONAL OBEDIENCE FOR JUSTIFICATION IN THE SIGHT OF GOD.

Faith establishes the law because faith is not something ABSTRACT but it is the "law of faith" previously mentioned in verse 27 and explained in verses 24-26 to be in the PERSONAL OBEDIENCE of Jesus Christ to the Law of God FOR US as the propitiation (satisfaction) of God's Law in our behalf. Hence, faith establishes the law ONLY IN THE PERSONAL OBEDIENCE and DEAD of Christ "FOR US."

 

[BobRyan]

The civil law and ceremonial law are nothing more than the moral law expressed in civil life and in symbolism.

How so?

In Colossians 2 Paul states that the ceremonial law is pointing forward to the Messiah dying on the cross.

In 1Cor 5 Paul says "Christ our Passover has been slain".

At no point do the Ten Commandments say "and so Christ was slain".


Paul said "DO we then make VOID the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH the Law of God" Rom 3:31.

By direct contrast we have -

The whole Mosaic system of law (moral, civil, ceremonial) is abolished as well as the law written upon the conscience of men is abolished

By direct contrast with that claim we have in Heb 8:6-12 the SAME promises given in the OT regarding the New Covenant and the Law written on the heart and mind - are repeated and affirmed in the NT.

Faith establishes the law because faith is not something ABSTRACT but it is the "law of faith"

There is no "Do we then abolish the Law of Faith by our faith. God forbid! in fact we establish the Law of faith" in all of scripture - no not even in Rom 3:31.

Thus Paul can say "But what matters is keeping the Commandments of God" 1Cor 7:19

And Christ can say PRE-cross "IF you Love Me KEEP My Commandments" John 14:15.

And the saints are known in Rev 14:12 as those who "KEEP the Commandments of God" AND have faith in Jesus.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Dr. Walter]

The cross is the epitomy of God's law being vindicated. Violation of God's law demanded the cross. The life of Christ symbolized in the ceremonial ordinances present the law of God - His righteousness.

You confuse the grounds of justification by "faith" in Christ as the fulfillment, completion and "end" of the law for righteousness to all believers with regeneration and the effectually working out of the principles of the law written on the hearts.

Notice the New Covenant is UNCONDITIONAL in regard to man but is composed of the Sovereign "I WILL" and please notice the words "MAKE THEM" and notice what God makes them do. Relate this with Philip. 2:13 and Ephesians 2:10 beginning with the preposition "unto" and notice that it is effectual by God in every saint according to the measure of faith and grace given in progressive sanctification.

How so?

In Colossians 2 Paul states that the ceremonial law is pointing forward to the Messiah dying on the cross.

In 1Cor 5 Paul says "Christ our Passover has been slain".

At no point do the Ten Commandments say "and so Christ was slain".


Paul said "DO we then make VOID the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH the Law of God" Rom 3:31.

By direct contrast we have -


By direct contrast with that claim we have in Heb 8:6-12 the SAME promises given in the OT regarding the New Covenant and the Law written on the heart and mind - are repeated and affirmed in the NT.




There is no "Do we then abolish the Law of Faith by our faith. God forbid! in fact we establish the Law of faith" in all of scripture - no not even in Rom 3:31.

Thus Paul can say "But what matters is keeping the Commandments of God" 1Cor 7:19

And Christ can say PRE-cross "IF you Love Me KEEP My Commandments" John 14:15.

And the saints are known in Rev 14:12 as those who "KEEP the Commandments of God" AND have faith in Jesus.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

The cross is the epitomy of God's law being vindicated.

The Cross is God's Justice being vindicated by upholding the penalty demanded by His Law - instead of abolishing His Law.

It is His Mercy being demonstrated in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us.

But Christ's death on the cross is not "predicted by the Ten Commandments" nor forshadowed by them. The Ten Commandments say nothing about forgiveness from sin. They speak only of the high standard of righteousness and point out violation.

And as Romans 3 and Galatians 3 point out - mankind is still to this very day condemned by that still-valid still-authoritative Law of God today just as much as in any age.

Violation of God's law demanded the cross.

Violation of God's Law demands the 2nd death - the lake of fire "the wages of sin is death" Rom 6:23 -- "The soul that sins it shall die" Ezek 18:4.

But IF God is going to forgive even one sin of one person -- and does not want to toss His Law out the window as "the solution" then He has to pay the penalty the law demands instead of simply ignoring it.

To ignore the penalty would be to abolish His Law.

To uphold the penalty when He chooses to forgive would be to establish His Law as still valid and authoritative.

He is then both JUST and the JustiFIER of them that diligently seek Him.

You confuse the grounds of justification by "faith" in Christ as the fulfillment, completion and "end" of the law for righteousness to all believers with regeneration and the effectually working out of the principles of the law written on the hearts.

Christ brings about the end of the condemnation of the sinner by the Law of God as that sinner chooses to accept salvation. But then Christ writes His LAW on the heart (Heb 8:6-12) and it is the SAME Law that Jer 31:31-33 speaks about - when the New Covenant promise is written.

Notice the New Covenant is UNCONDITIONAL in regard to man but is composed of the Sovereign "I WILL" and please notice the words "MAKE THEM" and notice what God makes them do.

In Heb 3 and 4 (the context for Heb 8) Paul has already established the need to persevere.

In Heb 6 Paul condemns the case of those who fail to persevere.

In Heb 5 Paul condemns the case of those who fail to grow up.

Relate this with Philip. 2:13

In Phil 3 Paul perseveres reaching forward -- seeking to attain to the resurrection of the righteous.

and Ephesians 2:10 beginning with the preposition "unto" and notice that it is effectual by God in every saint according to the measure of faith and grace given in progressive sanctification.

In Eph 2:10 and Gal 2:20 it is "Christ in you" that enables you to do the work - as even in Romans 8 "by the Spirit putting to death the deeds of the flesh".

Walking in the sanctified life is something only the saints can do.

It is called "perseverance of the SAINTs" for a reason.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Dr. Walter]

But it was the PERSONAL act of Christ that vindicated it NOT YOURS or any BELIEVER's Personal acts just as it was Christ's PERSONAL OBEDIENCE that satisfied it NOT YOURS. That is the point of Romans 3:24-31.

I don't deny it is the same law written upon the heart. However, that law is not written upon your heart for the purpose of PERSONAL OBEDIENCE with justification as its end - because YOU CANNOT OBEY IT according to the demands of justification. It is written on your heart as result of CHRIST'S PREVIOUS SATISFACTION of it.

I have already shown that you have perverted Hebrews 3-6 and that such texts as Hebrews 4:2 demonstrate that. Hebrews 5 does not condemn to a lost condition those who do not grow but condemns only to a STUNTED condition needed reteaching not resaving. Hebrews 6 does not teach possible apostasy but teaches the very opposite because of "the things that accompany" real salvation.

The Cross is God's Justice being vindicated by upholding the penalty demanded by His Law - instead of abolishing His Law.





Christ brings about the end of the condemnation of the sinner by the Law of God as that sinner chooses to accept salvation. But then Christ writes His LAW on the heart (Heb 8:6-12) and it is the SAME Law that Jer 31:31-33 speaks about - when the New Covenant promise is written.



In Heb 3 and 4 (the context for Heb 8) Paul has already established the need to persevere.

In Heb 6 Paul condemns the case of those who fail to persevere.

In Heb 5 Paul condemns the case of those who fail to grow up.



In Phil 3 Paul perseveres reaching forward -- seeking to attain to the resurrection of the righteous.



In Eph 2:10 and Gal 2:20 it is "Christ in you" that enables you to do the work - as even in Romans 8 "by the Spirit putting to death the deeds of the flesh".

Walking in the sanctified life is something only the saints can do.

It is called "perseverance of the SAINTs" for a reason.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[billwald]

>"The law" refers to what is written in the conscience of all mankind beginning with Adam,

Agree that some moral principles are hard wired into all sane humans thus most every social contract covers such things as theft, assault, murder, and rape.

>later expanded by Moses in the Ten Commandments further written in the civil and ceremonial laws . . .

Disagree as written.

First, You differentiate between "law" and "covenant?" I don't! A covenant is a contract between two parties. It doesn't obligate 3rd parties. A law always specifies the jurisdiction of that law. For example, both the US and GB have traffic codes. A person in GB who stops for a red light is NOT obeying a US traffic code and vice versa even if both the US and the GB traffic codes have the same wording and the same intent.

Thus the Noahic Covenant obligates all humans, the Abrahamic Covenant obligates all "sons" of Abraham, and the Mosaic Covenant obligates all the people who came out of Egypt with Moses and their offspring. The Mosaic Covenant does NOT necessarialy obligate all gentiles in Milwaukee.

Second, if one accepts the Reformed position that the Church has "inherited" the obligations and blessings of "spiritual Israel" then Christians are obligated by provisions of the Mosaic Covenant and biological Jews are theologically no different than the rest of non-Christian humanity. This was the Baptist position until J. N. Darby invented Dispensationalism.

>. . . thus ultimately what is known as the "old Covenant" which is expounded upon by Moses and the prophets and is the primary reference in the Penteteuch, historical, poetical and prophetical books of the Old Testament thus giving the complete Old Testament Scriptures at times the designation as "the law".

Not exactly. This is the Pharisee/Pauline interpretation, not the Sadducee/priestly interpretation. Reading the Bible (Tanakh) beginning to end it was obvious that Moses established the canon (Torah) by various statements in Deut thus the Prophets and the Writings are commentary on Torah. The Pharisees added the Prophets and Writings to Torah and are in the process of adding everything at least through the Jerusalem Talmud. The side that wins the war writes the history books.

A careful reading of Acts can see two Christian denominations: the priestly Jerusalem Church and the Pharisee/Pauline proto denomination. The side which wins the war writes the history. After AD70 religious power was transferred from the priests to the rabbis and from the Jerusalem Church to Paul's followers.

>The phrases "deeds of the law" or "works of the law" refers to the obedience of the moral laws written upon human conscience, further written upon stone in the ten commandments and further written and expanded in the civil and ceremonial laws as expounded by Moses and the Prophets.

Everything not codified in the Ten Commandments is either civil or ceremonial and thus is specific to the historical social, political, and economic circumstances? OK, then you have a problem. There is no prohibition of homosexual activity outside of marriage in the Ten Commandments.

You say that only some of the expanded laws have moral content? The priests and the Pharisees both taught that the entire Torah summarized into 613 positive and negative statements has a moral content. As my list rabbi, please tell me which of the 613 have moral content.

For example, back then people used house roofs living space. The Law required that a parapet be built around the roof edge as a safety requirement. It was a sin of omission to fail to build this protection. By extension and application, is it a sin to fail to have a secure fence around one's swimming pool?

It is easy to demonstrate the above definitions in reference to the doctrine of justification in the New Testament.

>1. The same question given to Jesus concerning what to do in order to inherit eternal life by the Scribe in Luke 10:25-28 and in Matthew 19:17-28 to the Rich Young ruler is the law. In the former Deuteronomy 6 is the proper response while in the latter the ten commandments are specifically referred to by Christ.

This is a strange story. No one in the preceding 4000 years raised the question of inheriting eternal life.

>2. In Romans 7:1-7 the ten commandments are referred to as the law Paul was formerly under and the tenth commandment "thou shalt not covet" is specifically referred to.

I have always been amused that Paul chose to confess the only statement of the 10 Commandments that could NOT be prosecuted because it was a "thought crime."

>3. In Romans 2:13 the law that justifies in the day of judgement is the law the Jews boasted in - Romans 2:17. This is the same law the Jews boasted in for justification in Galatians 3:10-13.

Say again?????

>4. It is this law or the law that has the ten commandments as its basis that is done away with in Christ and is opposed or not "of faith" in Galatians 3:12 and opposed to faith in Romans 4:5 "worketh not BUT believeth."

Then exactly why do some Christians demand that the Ten Commandments be posted in public? What other Jewish law do Christians demand be posted?

>CONCLUSION: The Ten commandments is the basis for Jewish law and justification by faith in Christ is contrasted to justification in the sight of God by keeping the ten commandments inclusive of all its applications (civil, ceremonial).

Then you agree that most Gentiles in Milwaukee are not obligated by the Ten Commandments?

 

[BobRyan]

But it was the PERSONAL act of Christ that vindicated it NOT YOURS or any BELIEVER's Personal acts just as it was Christ's PERSONAL OBEDIENCE that satisfied it NOT YOURS. That is the point of Romans 3:24-31.

Indeed. That is why the lost come to God without any "good fruit" and are born-again.

And it is why the "good tree" of Matt 7 - showing that it is truly born-again, the new creation, with the Law of God written on the heart and mind, is not a "sinless tree" but rather a "good tree" and thus shows that it is "in Christ" - and is validated as being one of Christ's - STILL covered by His blood and life.

I don't deny it is the same law written upon the heart.

Then we have a start.

However, that law is not written upon your heart for the purpose of PERSONAL OBEDIENCE with justification as its end - because YOU CANNOT OBEY IT according to the demands of justification.

The argument is not that the life of Christ that stands in your place "is not needed".

Rather the argument is "by their fruits you shall know them".

This is not the time to circle back to "yes but their fruits have to be a sinless life to pass the law of God" as if that is the "you will know them" test of Matt 7.

Christ said "Hears these Words of mine and DOES them" - in Matt 7 as the fruit of the saints.

You keep coming back to "yes but only Christ has a flawless life" - and that continues to be tree - but it does not lessen the force of Christ's argument in Matt 7 that the saints are in fact KNOWN by their real fruit - the changed life SEEN in the works and deeds of the New Creation.

I have already shown that you have perverted Hebrews 3-6

Not even close.

You have only shown the OSAS filter's "need" to gloss over some key "inconvenient details" in Heb 3 - and as I point them out - you simply ignore the points raised.

and that such texts as Hebrews 4:2 demonstrate that.

Heb 4 gives a call for perseverance - and Heb 3 is written to the church - the contemporaries of Paul's day --- at NO point in Heb 3 OR Heb 4 does Paul claim that all of his fellow church members are lost.

Hebrews 5 does not condemn to a lost condition those who do not grow but condemns only to a STUNTED condition
[/quoted]

Actually - that was "my" position on Heb 5.

Hebrews 6 does not teach possible apostasy but teaches the very opposite

Not if you actually read it as if it were true.

The notion that "you must first go into apostasy" for a warning against going into apostasy to be "real" is pure fiction.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Everything not codified in the Ten Commandments is either civil or ceremonial and thus is specific to the historical social, political, and economic circumstances? OK, then you have a problem. There is no prohibition of homosexual activity outside of marriage in the Ten Commandments.

Indeed that would leave out Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbor as yourself" and Deut 6:5 "Love God with all your heart" and Lev 17:10 "Do not eat meat with blood" that Acts 15 insists Gentiles should observe.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Dr. Walter]

I think you make complicated what is presented in scripture as very simple. In Romans 3:27 Paul offers only two basic laws. The law of faith and the law of works and they are in contrast to one another.

Whether you want to talk about the law written on your conscience, or on stone or as a "covenant" or ceremonial or civil, or the phariseeical interpretation or the Sadduceeical or as "commandments," or the scriptures from which of these things are derived, all the above have one common principle and it is found in one word "DO" in relationship to the reader/hearer and the final consequence is "deeds" or "works" and thus it is the law of "WORKS."

The other principle or law is "of faith" and it is in direct contrast to "do" and "deeds" and "works" performed by the reader/hearer. This law has been defined in Romans 3:21-26. It is faith "IN" someone else and their works in direct contrast to YOU and your "works."

21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

The difference between justification by faith and faithfulness is that justification is "IN" the person and work of Christ as God's provision FOR YOU. It is never what you do but it is simply RECEIVING what Christ did FOR YOU.

Faithfulness is the response of love TO God for what you have already received through faith "IN" Christ.

Our faith IN Christ justified us in the sight of God our faithfulness TO God justifies us progressively in the sight of men.

I might add, that it is the CHRIST PROVISION or SATISFACTION rendered by Christ to God in our behalf that establishes the law in Romans 3:31 not our obedience to the Law. Faith IN Christ vindicates both the righteousness of the law and the penalty of the Law in the person of Christ not in our person and that is the only way the law will be established in respect to our person.

>"The law" refers to what is written in the conscience of all mankind beginning with Adam,

Agree that some moral principles are hard wired into all sane humans thus most every social contract covers such things as theft, assault, murder, and rape.

>later expanded by Moses in the Ten Commandments further written in the civil and ceremonial laws . . .

Disagree as written.

First, You differentiate between "law" and "covenant?" I don't! A covenant is a contract between two parties. It doesn't obligate 3rd parties. A law always specifies the jurisdiction of that law. For example, both the US and GB have traffic codes. A person in GB who stops for a red light is NOT obeying a US traffic code and vice versa even if both the US and the GB traffic codes have the same wording and the same intent.

Thus the Noahic Covenant obligates all humans, the Abrahamic Covenant obligates all "sons" of Abraham, and the Mosaic Covenant obligates all the people who came out of Egypt with Moses and their offspring. The Mosaic Covenant does NOT necessarialy obligate all gentiles in Milwaukee.

Second, if one accepts the Reformed position that the Church has "inherited" the obligations and blessings of "spiritual Israel" then Christians are obligated by provisions of the Mosaic Covenant and biological Jews are theologically no different than the rest of non-Christian humanity. This was the Baptist position until J. N. Darby invented Dispensationalism.

>. . . thus ultimately what is known as the "old Covenant" which is expounded upon by Moses and the prophets and is the primary reference in the Penteteuch, historical, poetical and prophetical books of the Old Testament thus giving the complete Old Testament Scriptures at times the designation as "the law".

Not exactly. This is the Pharisee/Pauline interpretation, not the Sadducee/priestly interpretation. Reading the Bible (Tanakh) beginning to end it was obvious that Moses established the canon (Torah) by various statements in Deut thus the Prophets and the Writings are commentary on Torah. The Pharisees added the Prophets and Writings to Torah and are in the process of adding everything at least through the Jerusalem Talmud. The side that wins the war writes the history books.

A careful reading of Acts can see two Christian denominations: the priestly Jerusalem Church and the Pharisee/Pauline proto denomination. The side which wins the war writes the history. After AD70 religious power was transferred from the priests to the rabbis and from the Jerusalem Church to Paul's followers.

>The phrases "deeds of the law" or "works of the law" refers to the obedience of the moral laws written upon human conscience, further written upon stone in the ten commandments and further written and expanded in the civil and ceremonial laws as expounded by Moses and the Prophets.

Everything not codified in the Ten Commandments is either civil or ceremonial and thus is specific to the historical social, political, and economic circumstances? OK, then you have a problem. There is no prohibition of homosexual activity outside of marriage in the Ten Commandments.

You say that only some of the expanded laws have moral content? The priests and the Pharisees both taught that the entire Torah summarized into 613 positive and negative statements has a moral content. As my list rabbi, please tell me which of the 613 have moral content.

For example, back then people used house roofs living space. The Law required that a parapet be built around the roof edge as a safety requirement. It was a sin of omission to fail to build this protection. By extension and application, is it a sin to fail to have a secure fence around one's swimming pool?

It is easy to demonstrate the above definitions in reference to the doctrine of justification in the New Testament.

>1. The same question given to Jesus concerning what to do in order to inherit eternal life by the Scribe in Luke 10:25-28 and in Matthew 19:17-28 to the Rich Young ruler is the law. In the former Deuteronomy 6 is the proper response while in the latter the ten commandments are specifically referred to by Christ.

This is a strange story. No one in the preceding 4000 years raised the question of inheriting eternal life.

>2. In Romans 7:1-7 the ten commandments are referred to as the law Paul was formerly under and the tenth commandment "thou shalt not covet" is specifically referred to.

I have always been amused that Paul chose to confess the only statement of the 10 Commandments that could NOT be prosecuted because it was a "thought crime."

>3. In Romans 2:13 the law that justifies in the day of judgement is the law the Jews boasted in - Romans 2:17. This is the same law the Jews boasted in for justification in Galatians 3:10-13.

Say again?????

>4. It is this law or the law that has the ten commandments as its basis that is done away with in Christ and is opposed or not "of faith" in Galatians 3:12 and opposed to faith in Romans 4:5 "worketh not BUT believeth."

Then exactly why do some Christians demand that the Ten Commandments be posted in public? What other Jewish law do Christians demand be posted?

>CONCLUSION: The Ten commandments is the basis for Jewish law and justification by faith in Christ is contrasted to justification in the sight of God by keeping the ten commandments inclusive of all its applications (civil, ceremonial).

Then you agree that most Gentiles in Milwaukee are not obligated by the Ten Commandments?

 

[Dr. Walter]

The argument is what is the life of Christ "needed" for? You want God to charge us DOUBLE. Christ's life is needed to meet the demands of God's law so as to FULFILL them in our behalf - justification. However, your position is that in addition to Christ fulfilling them in OUR BEHALF we must also fulfill them for the VERY SAME REASON - justification. Hence DOUBLE PAYMENT - DOUBLE FULFILLMENT of the law - DOUBLE JUDGEMENT (on Christ "for us" and then on our works).

Justice cannot require DOUBLE PAYMENT or DOUBLE JUDGEMENT for the same sins or for the same consequences.

Justification from the condemnation of the law and reward of heaven is provided by Christ and that is why we are a GOOD TREE. The product of the tree does not determine the nature of the tree in the beginning or in the end. It only determines its productivity. Productivity/sanctification is never 100% in this life and never CONSTANT in this life and never IDENTICAL to that of other true children of God. Productivity is not in order to become a GOOD TREE but is for temporal blessings and usefulnesss here and now and rewards in heaven (I Cor. 3:11-15).

In Matthew 7 the will of the Father in regard to righteousness was made clear in Matthew 5:20 - it must exceed that of natural born religious men and it must equal that of God (Mt. 5:46). Those in Matthew 7:21-23 had both the profession and the deeds but it was the FOUNDATION that was missing (Mt. 7:24-27). That foundation is the righteousenss of Christ and therefore all their deeds were regarded as "iniquity." Last, Christ "NEVER" knew them and therefore their profession from the start was false because it never was based upon the ONLY FOUNDATION that will survive judgement - the righteousness of Christ - sinless righteusness imputed to the believer.

You repudiate the writer of Hebrews own explanation of those in Hebrews 3 as he denies they were ever true believers in Hebrews 4:1-2. NEVER MIXED WITH FAITH IN THEM.

Lost PROFESSING people are the ones who go into apostasy from salvation - Heb. 4:1-2; I jn. 2:19

The argument is not that the life of Christ that stands in your place "is not needed".

Rather the argument is "by their fruits you shall know them".

This is not the time to circle back to "yes but their fruits have to be a sinless life to pass the law of God" as if that is the "you will know them" test of Matt 7.

Christ said "Hears these Words of mine and DOES them" - in Matt 7 as the fruit of the saints.

You keep coming back to "yes but only Christ has a flawless life" - and that continues to be tree - but it does not lessen the force of Christ's argument in Matt 7 that the saints are in fact KNOWN by their real fruit - the changed life SEEN in the works and deeds of the New Creation.


You have only shown the OSAS filter's "need" to gloss over some key "inconvenient details" in Heb 3 - and as I point them out - you simply ignore the points raised.

Heb 4 gives a call for perseverance - and Heb 3 is written to the church - the contemporaries of Paul's day --- at NO point in Heb 3 OR Heb 4 does Paul claim that all of his fellow church members are lost.

Hebrews 5 does not condemn to a lost condition those who do not grow but condemns only to a STUNTED condition
[/quoted]


The notion that "you must first go into apostasy" for a warning against going into apostasy to be "real" is pure fiction.

 

[BobRyan]

The difference between justification by faith and faithfulness is that justification is "IN" the person and work of Christ as God's provision FOR YOU. It is never what you do but it is simply RECEIVING what Christ did FOR YOU.

Faithfulness is the response of love TO God for what you have already received through faith "IN" Christ.

Our faith IN Christ justified us in the sight of God our faithfulness TO God justifies us progressively in the sight of men.

That is the part where we agree.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

The argument is what is the life of Christ "needed" for? You want God to charge us DOUBLE. Christ's life is needed to meet the demands of God's law so as to FULFILL them in our behalf - justification. However, your position is that in addition to Christ fulfilling them in OUR BEHALF we must also fulfill them for the VERY SAME REASON - justification. Hence DOUBLE PAYMENT - DOUBLE FULFILLMENT of the law - DOUBLE JUDGEMENT (on Christ "for us" and then on our works).

The New Birth creates a New tree - a new Creation. That New Creation is "known by its fruit". Matt 7.

The future "gospel judgment" of Rom 2:16 that involves justification (Rom 2:11-13) does not change the status of the lost to saved. That came at justification past (Rom 5:1).

Rather the future judgment - reveals who already IS the good tree. (what you call "in the sight of men") but it does so in the Daniel 7:9-10 context of the courtroom - where books are used and myriads and myriads are in the courtroom and then "judgment is passed in favor fo the saints" Dan 7:22 NASB

there is no "double payment" in observing that the good tree produces good fruit.

There is only one judgment upon the saints - and that is the one found in Daniel 7:22 - just before the 2nd coming and we also see it future to Paul's day in Rom 2:16, in 2Cor 5:10, in Rev 14:7 etc.

Justification from the condemnation of the law and reward of heaven is provided by Christ and that is why we are a GOOD TREE.

That is the Romans 5:1 principle of justification past - where the lost becomes the saved.

The product of the tree does not determine the nature of the tree in the beginning or in the end.

It reveals the nature of the tree.

Productivity is not in order to become a GOOD TREE

That much is actually true.

but is for temporal blessings and usefulnesss

In Romans 2:6-16 and in Matt 7 and in Matt 25 it results in heaven or hell.

You repudiate the writer of Hebrews own explanation of those in Hebrews 3 as he denies they were ever true believers in Hebrews 4:1-2. NEVER MIXED WITH FAITH IN THEM.

wrong.

In Heb 3 Paul speaks to BOTH the contemporary readers AND to Israel in the wilderness.

It is not true EITHER of all Israel in the wilderness (which included Moses, Joshua, Caleb, Aaron etc) nor of all of Paul's Christian contempories (Peter, John, Matthew, ...) in Heb 3 - that all of them were lost.

In Heb 6:1-8 Paul is making no reference at all to Israel in the desert rather he is speaking specifically to 5:11 "it is hard to explain since YOU have become dull of hearing...".

Lost PROFESSING people are the ones who go into apostasy

The lost do not "go into apostasy" - the lost "are lost".

Hint: Heb 6 is not a warning to the lost about "becoming lostER".

in Christ,

Bob