He Did Away Withy The Law

[Darrell C]

From the assortment I have had to engage me there seems no limit to the variety but they have all been consistant on the idea that the Bible Jesus, Paul, peter and the other followers of Jesus taught from, the Old Testament of the Christian Bible. I have even encountered the statement that all the swcripture a New Testament Christian needs to read is the Sermonh on the Mount.

While I would agree with in part, we do not forget the teaching afforded us in the New Testament. Of course they taught from the Old Testament scripture, we do so to this day.

But...should we say that when Paul wrote to the Corinthians, for example, we go through and pay attention to what he quotes from the OT only, or do we consider that he taught under inspiration of God and heed the insruction given through Paul also?

The Old Testament did not make clear to man such doctrines as the resurrection, but was vague in comparison to that which is revealed in the New Testament.

And while it remains that there will be false teachers that utilize both Old and New Testament scripture, that does not negate the responsibility of believers to heed that which is commanded in all the scripture, including those things taught by Paul.

While we do not abandon the first principles of the oracles of God, neither do we fail by slothfulness to "go on unto perfection," and to embrace that which was revealed to man both in the person of Christ and through those He chose to reveal doctrine through.

I´m sorry, Darrell, I need a little light on this point, it has escaped me.

Sorry, I thought this...

While concering our daily conversation, this is true.

However, when we consider that the Christ came to fulfill the law, we go beyond the keeping of commandments:



Hebrews 10:14

King James Version (KJV)

14For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.


Those that are not "perfect" are still under the law.

And they will seek perfection even as those that sought righteousness did...and they will fail, even as those under the law did.

...would help clarify.

However, when we consider that the Christ came to fulfill the law, we go beyond the keeping of commandments:

The point is that Christ came to fulfill the law, and He did that. In the minds of some the picture of Christ fulfilling the law is limited to His performance of statutes and ordinances, while other go beyond that to see that it was not the keeping of the law only (which of course He would keep in perfection), but that which the law prophesied concerning Him, which He explains to the two disciples in Luke 24, for instance.

But...this is where we go beyond even that: and that is the completion that Christ brought to salvation. Not just "He died for our sin," but how we as believers are moved into a position of righteousness based upon His fulfillment.

"For the law could make nothing perfect (complete)."

"By one sacrifice He has perfected (made complete) forever them that are sanctified."

Now, let's put that into the context of the conversation at hand: Who is it that "keeps the law?"

We know of a certainty that what God has declared to be righteous is righteous, and that which He declares to be evil is evil. So when we look at the work of Christ we go beyond the Christ "keeping the law," beyond the Lord fulfilling prophecy in the Person of the Christ, and on to that which has been accomplished in man in salvation...because of Him.

When we debate about whether Christians keep the law or not, we have to keep it clear that Christ did that which man could not do. In our lives as believers Christ continues to do that which we cannot do, and that is to convict us of sin in our lives, whereby we are conformed to the image of Christ in practical application.

We do not keep the law because we read the law and like the Pharisees seek to perform those things, but we keep the law as the law of God is revealed to our hearts. While it may be written upon our hearts, we will not be able to read it except God bring light that we might see and understand.

We will be like children under the covers reading a book with a flashlight that has grown dim. Christ in us not only turns on the light, he takes off the blanket...lol.

All I am saying is that we must be careful as to how we approach the subject of "Christians keeping the law."

God bless.

 

[DaChaser1]

Antinomianism


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Antinomianism (a term coined by Martin Luther, from the Greek ἀντί, "against" + νόμος, "law") is defined as holding that, under the gospel dispensation of grace, moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation.[1]

Although the concept is related to the foundational Protestant belief of Sola Fide where justification is through faith alone in Christ, it is taken to an extreme in antinomianism. It is seen by some as the opposite of the notion that obedience to a code of religious law earns salvation: legalism or works righteousness.

While there is wide agreement within Christianity that "antinomianism" is heresy, what constitutes antinomianism is often in disagreement. The term "antinomian" emerged soon after the Protestant Reformation (c.1517) and has historically been used mainly as a pejorative against Christian thinkers or sects who carried their belief in justification by faith further than was customary.[2] For example, Martin Luther preached justification by faith alone but was also an outspoken critic of antinomianism, perhaps most notably in his Against the Antinomians (1539).

While the charge of antinomianism can and often does apply to those who reject the keeping of any codified moral laws, antinomian theology does not necessarily imply the embrace of ethical permissiveness; rather it usually implies emphasis on the inner working of the Holy Spirit as the primary source of ethical guidance.[2]

Although the term originated in early controversies of Protestant doctrine in the 16th century, it has its roots in debates over the Synoptic Gospels and the Pauline Epistles and the issue of Paul of Tarsus and Judaism in the 1st century, and it can be extended to any religious group believing they are not bound to obey the laws of their own religious tradition. However few groups or sects, outside of Christian anarchism or Jewish anarchism, explicitly call themselves "antinomian".


This should not be named among us:type:


In his Introduction to Romans, Luther stated that saving faith is,


a living, creative, active and powerful thing, this faith. Faith cannot help doing good works constantly. It doesn’t stop to ask if good works ought to be done, but before anyone asks, it already has done them and continues to do them without ceasing. Anyone who does not do good works in this manner is an unbeliever...Thus, it is just as impossible to separate faith and works as it is to separate heat and light from fire! [[5]

The Westminster Confession of Faith states:


Faith, thus receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification; yet it is not alone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but works by love.[6]

The classic Methodist commentator Adam Clarke held,


The Gospel proclaims liberty from the ceremonial law: but binds you still faster under the moral law. To be freed from the ceremonial law is the Gospel liberty; to pretend freedom from the moral law is Antinomianism.[7]

Likewise on on Titus 1:16 ("They profess that they know God; but in works they deny, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate." KJV):


Full of a pretended faith, while utterly destitute of those works by which a genuine faith is accredited and proved.[8]


To which the Presbyterian commentator Mathew Henry concurs: "There are many who in word and tongue profess to know God, and yet in their lives and conversations deny and reject him; their practice is a contradiction to their profession." [9]

Though historically a general consensus has been evident as to which laws of the Old Testament pertain to the category of moral law which Christians are enjoined to keep, (see Biblical law in Christianity) certain laws can somewhat difficult, and may be vulnerable to subjective judgment, (see Cafeteria Christianity), and a broad definition of antinomianism can also be exercised. Christian sects and theologians who feel that they are freed from more laws than is customary are often called "antinomian" by their critics, while those who feel that more than the customary laws apply are in turn called "Judaizers" or legalists by their critics. Theological charges of antinomianism typically imply that the opponent's doctrine leads to various sorts of licentiousness, and imply that the antinomian chooses his theology in order to further a career of dissipation. However, the conspicuous austerity of life among many sects accused of antinomianism (such as Anabaptists or Calvinists) suggests that these accusations are often, or even mostly, made for rhetorical effect. Accusations of antinomianism have also been used more loosely to criticize doctrines that erode the authority of the church, or to criticize teachings perceived as hostile to government and civic law.
Contemporary Evangelical theologian J.I. Packer defines 5 strains of Antinomianism:
Dualistic Antinomianism (Gnostic) This view sees salvation as for the soul only, and bodily behavior as irrelevant both to God’s interest and the soul’s health…
Spirit-centered Antinomianism …puts such trust in the Holy Spirit’s inward prompting as to deny any need to be taught by the law how to live. Freedom from the law as a way of salvation is assumed to bring with it freedom from the law as a guide to conduct.
Christ-centered Antinomianism …argues that God sees no sin in believers, because they are in Christ, who kept the law for them, and therefore what they actually do makes no difference, provided that they keep believing.
Dispensational Antinomianism …denies that biblical law is God’s direct command and affirms that the Bible’s imperative statements trigger the Word of the Spirit, which when it comes may or may not correspond exactly to what is written.
Situationist Antinomianism …says that a motive and intention of love is all that God now requires of Christians, and the commands of the Decalogue and other ethical parts of scripture, for all that they are ascribed to God directly, are mere rules of thumb for loving, rules that love may at times disregard.[10]

[edit]

We are NOT saying though thatthe law as to its Moral respect no longer valid, rather that Jesus fully kept the law, his obdeience allowed God to reckon me as also having kept its fullness, justified me...

Point is that we are to walk by faith, in power of the HS, and when we do that...

the fruit evidenced will be keeping the moral law, as we will be pleasing Christ and walking as we shoud be!

 

[DaChaser1]

No one on this thread has suggested that the law can save anyone. The question is though, if you are not seeking to keep God's law, what reason do you have to suppose that you have Christ?

' Not everyone who says to Me, "Lord, Lord," shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out emons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?" And then I will declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practise lawlessness!"' (Matt 7:21-23).

The will of the Father is that we keep His law. If we disregard His law then ipso facto we are practising lawlessness.

N.B. Don't trust the NIV reading of verse 23. It's not 'evildoers,' it's 'You who practise lawlessness.'

Steve

We are saying that the proces of keeping the moral aspects of the Law is by relying upon the power of the Holy spirit residing in us, and Christ power in us allows us to live godly and to stay pure and clean before the Lord...

Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is power/peace/ability to live for God as we should...

We just see it being Christ in and through us as the One keeping His law....

 

[DaChaser1]

Hello MB, I think the primary problem here is the inability if the OP (opening post)to distinguish...just exactly what it is talking about...lol.

While some that are engaging in the debate have in view the economy of the First Covenant, meaning the practice which those under the First Covenant lived and participated in, others have in view the basic law of God and that which God has expressed as His will for man.

It is the responsibility of the one seeking to teach to...teach.

And that is apparently not important, or this debate would have ended already.

As born again believers we understand without doubting that we do not, as has been suggested, believe that we have liberty to murder, commit adultery, lie, steal...et cetera.

But we do not, on the other hand, disregard the clear teaching of the New Testament which clearly states that we do not live according to the law in the sense that the first century Jew under the ministry of Christ would have looked at it.By the way...I call Him the Holy Spirit too...:thumbsup:

God bless.

i am so confused as to what those among us reformed here think the Law means to us today!

I take it to be the moral aspect of the law still in effect, as that is what God requires to live "Holy", but think Bible teaches that we do that by abiding in Christ, and yielding to the power of the HS in us, and by TAHT method be found keeping those moral aspects today!

 

[Darrell C]

i am so confused as to what those among us reformed here think the Law means to us today!

I take it to be the moral aspect of the law still in effect, as that is what God requires to live "Holy", but think Bible teaches that we do that by abiding in Christ, and yielding to the power of the HS in us, and by TAHT method be found keeping those moral aspects today!

I don't think you are that confused, brother. I thought you put into words and expressed a genuine and sincere understanding in the previous couple of posts.

I would suggest that titles and labels that do not stem from God's word be put on the shelf, for your reformation did not begin centuries ago, but on that day in which you yielded yourself to the Spirit of God, agreeing with that which He convicted you of.

You put into words the simplicity of the view we have, as Christians, of the law of God.

I view it as a perpetual yielding to God as we learn of Him and about Him. While those that have not been born again can read scripture and apply the principles there because the principles agree with them, the born again believer reads and applies them because he agrees with God.

And there is a significant difference between the two.


It is unfortunate that man can read scripture and think that by his own efforts that he can ingratiate himself to God. But, even believers can fall into that pattern...right? We can convince ourselves that by tithing or church attendance or...whatever, this somehow makes us "better" Christians.

But the effective power of God in our lives always derives from our yielding to Him. When He is in control, it will be as evident as it is when we are in control.

God bless.

 

[MB]

I am not going to give this post the attention you are seeking, rathyer I am going to ask you to go get a glass of iced tea and to sit down and to drink it slowly as you pray. Then, please, with a cooler head, go back ad reread the post you have responded to and try to respond a bit more thoughtfully. I, very much dislike putting people on ignore but I am close to that in your case. Let´s stop the tit for tat and begin to thoughtfully discuss.

No thankyou Bill I'm dusting you off my shoes. You won't receive the truth. You just jump to your own conclusions and then accuse others falsely. It happens alot with Calvinist who are convinced of them selves like you.
MB

 

[th1bill]

No thankyou Bill I'm dusting you off my shoes. You won't receive the truth. You just jump to your own conclusions and then accuse others falsely. It happens alot with Calvinist who are convinced of them selves like you.
MB

Well, the Holy Spirit did not give you that and you did no research, either. I follow neither of the two main camps, I am, and it is recorded on these forums, a Biblicist!

 

[MB]

Well, the Holy Spirit did not give you that and you did no research, either. I follow neither of the two main camps, I am, and it is recorded on these forums, a Biblicist!

No Matter what you call your self. It doesn't make you right. You know absolutely nothing about me yet your still willing to judge me as if you had the right. I'd say Pharisitical Hypocrisy would be a better title and a lot closer to the truth.
MB

 

[th1bill]

No Matter what you call your self. It doesn't make you right. You know absolutely nothing about me yet your still willing to judge me as if you had the right. I'd say Pharisitical Hypocrisy would be a better title and a lot closer to the truth.
MB

I am sorry you have chosen to follow Satan, it is a miserable po9sition to be found in but your statement directly draws on the Satan inspired, world adopted, misinterpretation of Matthew 7:1. This is a gross misuse of God´s Holy word.

The contest for the propoer application of this verse in contained in the first paragraph od Matthew 7, verses 1-12. The greater context of the Bible does not change this and I will deal with just this paragraph. This passage teaches us the we are to judge but that we are to d owhat I have come to know as a Spiritual Inventory first! To get the log out of my eye I must get right with God. This, I seek after each day.
Now, please, what did I call myself?

 

[MB]

I am sorry you have chosen to follow Satan, it is a miserable po9sition to be found in but your statement directly draws on the Satan inspired, world adopted, misinterpretation of Matthew 7:1. This is a gross misuse of God´s Holy word.

The contest for the propoer application of this verse in contained in the first paragraph od Matthew 7, verses 1-12. The greater context of the Bible does not change this and I will deal with just this paragraph. This passage teaches us the we are to judge but that we are to d owhat I have come to know as a Spiritual Inventory first! To get the log out of my eye I must get right with God. This, I seek after each day.
Now, please, what did I call myself?

Why do you hate me so much? is it because you are so full of hate?. You started this demeaning language with your first post to me and you have not let up. I admit that I have not been kind to you since you've started this nonsense. Is this a racial hatred. Do you hate me because of what I said or because of what you think I said. It is obvious that you do hate me by the intent of your mean spirit. How are you going to explain hating me to the Father? We are suppose to be brothers in Christ but that can't be because you are so busy hurling hateful remarks at me. People are known to be Christians because of their love for one another. Yet you have no such love for me. You disagree with me that's OK I disagree with a lot of people here but I don't hate any of them for our disagreements. Not even you. You have manipulated me into this arguement because of my first post on this thread. This is it below.

Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
If we are saved we are no longer under the Law but under grace.
Rom 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
There does seem to be those who would place us back under the Law. Yet as you can see we who are in Christ are not ruled by the Law.
MB

Read it again then tell me why you hate me. Because this is really what started you on your quest to let me know for sure that you are full of HATE.
MB

 

[gb93433]

Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is power/peace/ability to live for God as we should...

Is not the Spirit of God always present everywhere? Just because that is true does not mean people will live for Jesus. They may blaspeheme the Holy Spirit. Just look at Judas.

We just see it being Christ in and through us as the One keeping His law....

Could give further explanation?

 

[thomas15]

No, you need to take a class in context and understanding?

You, might, consider, possibly, for, yourself, a, class, in, English, composition,!

 

[thomas15]

Hello MB, I think the primary problem here is the inability if the OP (opening post)to distinguish...just exactly what it is talking about...lol.

I think you have nailed it brother!

 

[DaChaser1]

Is not the Spirit of God always present everywhere? Just because that is true does not mean people will live for Jesus. They may blaspeheme the Holy Spirit. Just look at Judas.

[quote[] Specific reference was to the saint of Gd, as the HS is the ONE who gives the means by which he can live as he should for Christ!

Could give further explanation?[/QUOTE]


we can ONLY be successful in living for the Lord when we consider ourselves crucifed in/with christ, dead to sin, and allow the HS now to empower and enable us to live as we should...

Its the Lord Himself in us that empowers us to live as we should...

 

[gb93433]

we can ONLY be successful in living for the Lord when we consider ourselves crucifed in/with christ, dead to sin, and allow the HS now to empower and enable us to live as we should...

The only trouble I have with that is that God uses imperfect people. I do not see spirituality being measured in terms of anything else other than relationship with Jesus. We know if we have a good relationship or not. We cannot boast about a relationship but we can boast about being spiritual if we measure it any other way. The righteous rise seven times and rise again. God knows we will fail. I also believe that there are times when he helps us fail so that we will draw closer in our relationship with Him and trust Him more instead of ourselves.

I think there is a difference between maturity and sinlessness.

 

[th1bill]

Why do you hate me so much? is it because you are so full of hate?. You started this demeaning language with your first post to me and you have not let up. I admit that I have not been kind to you since you've started this nonsense. Is this a racial hatred. Do you hate me because of what I said or because of what you think I said. It is obvious that you do hate me by the intent of your mean spirit. How are you going to explain hating me to the Father? We are suppose to be brothers in Christ but that can't be because you are so busy hurling hateful remarks at me. People are known to be Christians because of their love for one another. Yet you have no such love for me. You disagree with me that's OK I disagree with a lot of people here but I don't hate any of them for our disagreements. Not even you. You have manipulated me into this arguement because of my first post on this thread. This is it below.



Read it again then tell me why you hate me. Because this is really what started you on your quest to let me know for sure that you are full of HATE.
MB

Neighbor, what you perceive as hate is so very wrong. What I am not is a polite liar. I am very much Bible centered for my life-style and I admit, any that have not sought after God will have diffi8culty in recognizing the love of God because there i8s so much polite lying in the world and thyere is none among the mekmbers of the Bride of Christ. You see, a iie is just that, a lie and each lie is another sin to repent of. And when a child of God repents, they turn 180 degrees and work nhever to do that again.

A holy life means that the person is living a life set apart to God and anything else is a formula for access into eternity in Hell. Ny admitted goal is to turn you from there, into Heaven. If you think me rude and hateful, I wish it not be but what is, is.

 

[th1bill]

You, might, consider, possibly, for, yourself, a, class, in, English, composition,!

At 67 I am not likely to go there and your intended insult isw noted and discarded. My suggestion was just that because you failed to comprehend both myself and the scriptures. I did not just lash out at you.

 

[MB]

Neighbor, what you perceive as hate is so very wrong. What I am not is a polite liar. I am very much Bible centered for my life-style and I admit, any that have not sought after God will have diffi8culty in recognizing the love of God because there i8s so much polite lying in the world and thyere is none among the mekmbers of the Bride of Christ. You see, a iie is just that, a lie and each lie is another sin to repent of. And when a child of God repents, they turn 180 degrees and work nhever to do that again.

A holy life means that the person is living a life set apart to God and anything else is a formula for access into eternity in Hell. Ny admitted goal is to turn you from there, into Heaven. If you think me rude and hateful, I wish it not be but what is, is.

I forgive you in spite of what you may think of me or how you may judge me. Not because you asked for it but because I will not carry a grudge against anyone. I wish nothing but peace for you.
MB

 

[thomas15]

At 67 I am not likely to go there and your intended insult isw noted and discarded. My suggestion was just that because you failed to comprehend both myself and the scriptures. I did not just lash out at you.

Well, if you are going to tell others, how, to live,, and correct their spiritual faults,,,, you should learn, how, to, write.

Never too old to learn brother. At 53 I'm by at least a decade older than the next youngin' in my college algebra class! And you know something? I can learn something from the kiddos!

 

[th1bill]

Well, if you are going to tell others, how, to live,, and correct their spiritual faults,,,, you should learn, how, to, write.

Never too old to learn brother. At 53 I'm by at least a decade older than the next youngin' in my college algebra class! And you know something? I can learn something from the kiddos!

LOL! Well i´ve een acused of a good deal of education over the years but the truth is that I did, almost graduate the eigth grade bef0re I enlisted i the Army and tested for my GED. I took a couple of courses at the Community College but after the second one I still knew more thyan the teacher did and could not see the logic in tossing good money after bad ad quit the endevor but I hope you enjoy your cloass better than I did mine.