Featured Justified by the Law is a Scriptural Truth

Then accuse Christ as he is the one that said "DO this and thou SHALT LIVE"

There is no borderline deception at all. It is a fact that the Law will DECLARE anyone righteous who is righteous and it will CONDEMN anyone who is not righteous but it will never MAKE righteous anyone who is unrighteous.

 

Who are you arguing against? Not me? I believe that and never said anything other wise. You need to read what I said more carefully as you are simply creating a straw man argument.

 

You are either not reading what I said and/or not understanding what I said. Read it again please and respond only when you think you understand what I said - pleeeeease!

How so? He wasn't physically dead! He did not ask about spiritual life! He asked what can I DO to "inherit eternal life?"

You are proving my point!!! That is precisely what the law requires to be DECLARED righteous! One must be "perfect." The issue here is not whether the law can DECLARE a sinless person righteous because it can. The issue here is not whether the law can CONDEMN a sinner because it can. The issue here is not whether the law can MAKE righteous the unrighteous because it cannot.

The issue is that the Jews thought by DOING the works of the Law they could inherit eternal life and Jesus agrees on the premise that DOING the Law would inherit eternal life because if they could do the law they would not fall under its condemnation but would be declared righteous and death would have no authority over them. Therefore, Christ said "DO THIS" and you shall live. Why did he say that? Why didn't he say you can't inherit eternal life by doing the law because you cannot keep the law as it demands? Why Hank? That is what you are saying and that is what you would have said! But Jesus did not say that, because he knew they believed they could inherit eternal life by keeping the law and so he pointed them to the law! Why? Because by attempting to do the law it would stir up indwelling sin and they would find out that instead of keeping it they would be condemned by it (Rom. 7:7-11). In other words no one needs the gospel until they know they are lost.

As a self-righteous Jew Paul said he was "blameless" with regard to keeping the law! But blameless before who? Not God! He was blameless in his own eyes and in the eyes of the common Jew as they honestly believed they were DOING or KEEPING the Law. But as Jesus pointed out, they were only "blameless" OUTWARDLY but inwardly were full of death but didn't realize it

 

The Biblical premise is that anyone who keeps the law will inherit eternal life and will not be condemned by the law but shall live on judgment day. That is the premise Jesus operated on when dealing with the Lawyer and Rich young ruler.

That is the premise laid down in Romans 2:6-11.

That is the premise laid down in Galatians 3:10

That is the premise Paul as the unregenerate self-righteous Saul operated on in Philip. 3:6

That is the premise confirmed by God in Lev 18:5 Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the LORD.

This premise is true! However, the PROBLEM is not with the law or with that premise but with "the flesh" and indwelling sin. The problem is that self-righteous man believes he can fulfill that premise. However, that is why the law was "added" in order to demonstrate although the premise is true the THINKING of self-righteous man is not true. In other words, you don't need the gospel until YOU KNOW you are condemned and without hope.

Now Gentleman, until you understand and accept this premise you will never be able to deal with the heresy of NT Wright and the "new perspective." Why? Because NT Wright believes that the Jews did not THINK they could obtain a righteous moral standing before God by keeping the Law but only kept the law as covenant identification as the people of God. But in fact, the Jews did believe they could obtain a right moral standing by keeping the law and Jesus and the scriptures did teach that any who kept the law would in fact be declared to have a right moral standing before God. However, you are playing right into the hands of this false movement by denying this Biblical premise.

 

I am no youngster. I have been in the ministry for 45 years, four graduate degrees in Bible and written and published over 40 books on Bible subjects and General Editor of a KJV New Testament study Bible. And as far as age we are only 5 years apart. My picture was taken during my early 60's when I had hair on top of my head.

You obviously don't understand what I wrote as I am not even remotely suggesting that any man can ascend into heaven by keeping the law. I suggest you reread what I said carefully and understand it first before speaking. You certainly do not understand what I wrote or you would not say such things. Perhaps, it may be my fault in not stating my position more plainly, or easily for you to grasp.

Therefore, let me state it positively instead of negatively so you are sure to grasp it (at least I hope). There is but one way, one savior, one gospel of salvation and it is wholly by grace without works - no other way between Genesis and Revelation! Got it? So that is not my dispute.

Second, the law was never given or designed to justify sinners and is incapable of granting eternal life to any sinner. Got it? So that is not my dispute.

Third, the law condemns sinners but it does not condemn righteous, meaning sinless persons - that is fact!

Fourth, the Jews didn't believe any of the above! They believed they could indeed be declared righteous by the Law by doing their works. Of course they were wrong, but a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. Jesus approached the Lawyer and Rich Young Ruler ON THEIR TERMS. Their terms was, "I CAN DO" what God requires to inherit eternal life. Sure they were deceived, sure they are wrong, but nevertheless, Jesus meets them on their level and says, OK, if you want to obtain eternal life by SOMETHING YOU CAN DO, then just keep the Law (not how you interpret keeping it but how God interprets keeping it) and sure enough you will be declared righteous before God and thus not under the condemnation of the law and inherit eternal life. That is impossible BECAUSE THEY ARE SINNERS! You are right, it is impossible, but nevertheless, the premise is true, IF they can do that they will be declared righteous, they will not be under the condemnation of death by the law and therefore they will inherit eternal life. So Jesus says, "DO THIS and THOU SHALT LIVE"! So Bill, are you going to call Christ a liar? or is what he says true? It is one or the other? Which is it Bill? If you don't grasp this Bill you will be a sitting duck for the "new perspective on Paul" theory!

 

The New Perspective theory on Paul claims that Jews during the NT era did not believe in keeping the law in order to obtain a moral righteousness before God. Therefore, this theory says the phrases "justified without works" and the "the works of the law" have nothing to do with the idea of being justified before God by ones own moral righteousness by keeping the law. Instead, they claim these phrases were understood by the Jews to simply mean one does not have to identify with the law covenant to be recognized as the professing people of God. Now, one must identify with the Grace Covenant to be recognized as the people of God and your obedience identifies you as such. Therefore, this theory denies that the phrases "justified by the law" or "justified without works" has anything to do with personal moral righteousness achieved or sought out by personal obedience to the law.

The danger of this theory is that it removes from Romans and Galatians any disclaimer that one can be justified by obedience to God's commands. They have redefined the words "justified by works" and "works of the Law" to mean simply "covenant identification as people of God" rather than disclaimers that one can be justified by OBEYING God's commands. Instead, they claim that on judgment day your works are what declares you to be righteous before God and thus you need to be obedient in order to be declared righteous before God.

What I am trying to convey is that the Jews did believe in justification by obedience to the Law and that although Christ did not deny the premise, he did deny that any sinner could do that, and that Paul condemned such an approach to the law by sinners as a false doctrine of justification because they were sinners already and the law cannot make unrighteous men to be righteous nor declare sinners to be righteous. That is why penal substitutionary atonement is essential, where a truly righteous man takes the place of the sinner and satisfies both the righteous standard and penalty of Law in behalf of the sinner in order to be declared righteous "in Christ."

The point is that Jesus proves the Jews did believe in doing the works of the law in order to obtain a right moral standing before God, and that their premise was true for all who can keep the law as God defines keeping it - sinless perfection. The problem is that all have sinned and therefore none can achieve sinless perfection from the moment they are born into this world. The Law was given to demonstrate they are sinners, educate them so they do not think they can do the law in order to obtain a right standing before God.

 

Hank, lets be reasonable. He asked what could he do to inherit "eternal" life. Jesus is not going to give him a solution for something he never asked about! He did not ask about extendinng his PHYSICAL life. He was not accused of committing any capital offense. You are being completely unreasonable! He is asking about obtaining "eternal life" before God by something He could do - His works!

So he was not physically dead attempting to get physical life. He was not attempting to get around a capital offence. He was asking about "eternal" life by earning it by his works - "what CAN I DO."

Oh, I see it is tit for tat? Forget I said you did not misunderstand me if that offends you. My purpose was to demonstrate that the Biblical principle is justification, in the sense of being declared righteous, is precisely what Jesus is teaching through proper obedience to the Law. The only thing that prevents that principle from being a reality is our sinfulness. However, Jesus is approaching this according to the Biblical principle and from the perspective of the Jews of his day who actually believed they could be justified by keeping the law. In essence, Christ said, yes, the law will justify those who do it, so here is the law go for it and see if you can do it. That is precisely what Saul of Tarsus did, he went for it and by going for it the Law condemned his efforts rather than rewarded them as it exposed his sinful nature.

However, the problem was not with the Law or the principle of justification by the Law for those who keep it. The problem was in the flesh which had already violated it and continues to violate it when attempting to keep it sinlessly.

 

And I have been providing both meanings ("declare" and "make" righteous).

 

No wonder I put you on ignore as I tire of dealing with this kind of stupid response.

 

Can't you read plain English even when it is made bold and underlined? What do you think "make" and "declare" mean in the context I put them? Justify = "make righteous" or "declare to be righteous.

You are showing your shallow minded thinking. The glory of Christ is not being clouded nor his power, but he is being exalted, as he is providing the precise answer asked by the Lawyer. The Lawyer asked what could he "do" to inherit "eternal life" and Jesus answered him on the same level - "DO THIS and thou shalt live." That was the correct answer, as in attempting to do so, the Law was designed by God to educate him in his sinfulness. The point is that until you know you have a problem you are not ready for the solution. Jesus is sending him to the right authority to discover he has a problem and then, he will be ready for the solution. That scenario is described by Paul in taking the same approach to the Law (Rom. 7:8-11).

 

I can see this thread is finished. Have fun among yourselves.