Law Vs Grace, or Law AND Grace?

[lekh l'kha]

YES!!!!

The Bride of Yeshua is waking up finally!!!

Just from these two posts, I have hope that the ONE NEW MAN will finally come to pass.

Thanks, WolfBtn----you are RIGHT ON in where you're going. Yeshua said that the law will not pass away till ALL be fulfilled, and that will happen in the MILLENIUM.....

a.

.... And yet Jesus fulfilled the Law:

"Do not think that I have come to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to destroy but to fulfill." (Mat 5:17)

You can't carry the corpse of Moses across the Jordan and think it will lead you into the promised land.

Quote: Christ's apostle Paul:

"For through the Law I died to the law, that I might live to God." (Gal 2:19)

Let me rearrange this thinking just slightly

Thanks for the input, perhaps you would like to explain what Paul was saying. We all know his words, and what they say . . . but what do they mean? Without understanding it is difficult to find right application to what can easily be just memorized and quoted.

Pr 4:5 Get wisdom, get understanding: forget it not; neither decline from the words of my mouth.

6 Forsake her not, and she shall preserve thee: love her, and she shall keep thee.

7 Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and

with all thy getting get understanding.

(1.) How did Paul, "through the Law, die to the law?"

(2.) How does Paul "live to God?"

We know the setting which Paul is speaking regarding those who tried to "compel" Titus to be circumcised (ceremonial type and shadow part of the law, not moral) and also Peter "withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision" and "walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel." We know these being mere prophetic "types and shadows" which were fulfilled in the body of Christ have ceased due to the fulfillment of their purpose. But have the moral guidelines which were ordain for life to guide us us in a righteous love for God and humanity, (3.) have they too fulfilled their purpose that they as well have passed away and no longer applicable?

"So, behold, the days come, says Jehovah, that it shall no more be said, As Jehovah lives, who brought up the sons of Israel out of the land of Egypt; but, As Jehovah lives, who brought up the sons of Israel from the land of the north, and from all the lands where He had driven them. And I will bring them again into their lands that I gave to their fathers." (Jer. 16: 14-15)

"Behold, the days come, says Jehovah, that I will cut a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah, not according to the covenant that I cut with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which covenant of Mine they broke, although I was a husband to them, says Jehovah;" (Jer.31: 31-32)

It is NOT a "renewed" covenant - it is a totally NEW covenant. The covenant based on obedience to the Law God gave to Moses when He "took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt" was God's marriage-contract with Israel which they broke .

The New Covenant is a completely NEW marriage contract.

And Paul said that THE LAW IS ONLY IN EFFECT UNTIL SOMEONE DIES:

"Or are you ignorant, brothers; for I speak to those who know the Law; that the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives?" (Rom 7: 1)

"I have been crucified with Christ, and I live; yet no longer I, but Christ lives in me. And that life I now live in the flesh, I live by faith toward the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself on my behalf." (Gal.2: 20).

"For through the Law I died to the law, that I might live to God." (Gal.2: 19).

"I am the Vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, the same brings forth much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing." (Joh.15: 5)

It is the fruit of the Spirit of Christ produced by Christ in and through us that fulfills the Law

- it is NOT we who attempt to be obedient to the written and oral Law which condemns us as Law-breakers.

You decide that Paul meant what he did not mean, and claim that we misunderstand what Paul meant:

Thanks for the input, perhaps you would like to explain what Paul was saying. We all know his words, and what they say . . . but what do they mean? Without understanding it is difficult to find right application to what can easily be just memorized and quoted.

Then you claim that

your

teaching are "words of wisdom" - which insinuates that those who disagree with you are in error and that their words are words of folly:

Thanks for the input, perhaps you would like to explain what Paul was saying. We all

know

his words, and what they say . . . but what do they mean? Without understanding it is difficult to find right application to what can easily be just memorized and quoted.

Pr 4:5 Get wisdom, get understanding: forget it not; neither decline from the words of my mouth.

6 Forsake her not, and she shall preserve thee: love her, and she shall keep thee.

7 Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and

with all thy getting get understanding.

(1.) How did Paul, "through the Law, die to the law?"

(2.) How does Paul "live to God?"

We know the setting which Paul is speaking regarding those who tried to "compel" Titus to be circumcised (ceremonial type and shadow part of the law, not moral) and also Peter "withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision" and "walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel." We know these being mere prophetic "types and shadows" which were fulfilled in the body of Christ have ceased due to the fulfillment of their purpose. But have the moral guidelines which were ordain for life to guide us us in a righteous love for God and humanity, (3.) have they too fulfilled their purpose that they as well have passed away and no longer applicable?

We DO NOT obey the Law - we CANNOT obey the Law. We HAVE DIED to the Law and we walk BY FAITH IN JESUS and HIS SPIRIT produces fruit in and through us that fulfills the Law.

"the Law of sin and death" = the Law God gave to the Israelites through Moses "in the day He took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt"

Why?

Because the Law condemns us as sinners (Gal.3: 19; Rom.7: 13)

We cannot make ourselves a friend to the Law which has already condemned us as Law-breakers. Our trial is over. We are convicted Law-breakers, who were condemned to die, awaiting our execution. Jesus took our sin and death-penalty upon Himself, AND WE DIED WITH HIM, AND WHEN WE DIED WITH HIM, WE DIED TO THE LAW.

Must we now insult God by pretending that we are friends to the Law and the Law-giver AFTER we have already been condemned by the Law as Law-breakers???

Or are we to live by faith in the Son of God and submit to Him so that HE can produce the fruit in and through us which fulfills the Law??

Edited July 27, 2009 by lekh l'kha

[canuckamuck]

Lek you make complete sense and it is all there in the Word.

Not that it will make any difference. They can't even make a definition of their own terms. Apparently the law = any rules, suggestions, commandments, attributed to God.

But I know you mean the Mosaic law.

This would have been a two page thread if there were some definitions laid down.

[Guest shiloh357]

"

Behold, the days come, says Jehovah, that I will cut a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah, not according to the covenant that I cut with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which covenant of Mine they broke, although I was a husband to them, says Jehovah;" (Jer.31: 31-32)

It is NOT a "renewed" covenant - it is a totally NEW covenant. The covenant based on obedience to the Law God gave to Moses when He "took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt" was God's marriage-contract with Israel which they broke .

The New Covenant is a completely NEW marriage contract.

Actually it is a renewed covenant. The term "New Covenant" which Jeremiah uses in chapter 31 is "Brit Hadashah." Dashah in Hebrew meas to renew, with a view to improving upon the former. Jesus used the same term in reference the New Covenant cut in His blood.

It is a better covenant but it has all of the elements the former covenant had. The New Covenant has blood, a sacrifice, a priesthood, a temple and a High Priest. It has all of the elements the Old Covenant had but in a much better form since it is Jesus' blood, Jesus as the high priest, we are his corporate temple and Jesus is of course, the sacrifice as well.

And Paul said that THE LAW IS ONLY IN EFFECT UNTIL SOMEONE DIES:

"Or are you ignorant, brothers; for I speak to those who know the Law; that the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives?" (Rom 7: 1)

Now you are mixing contexts and issues. Romans chapter 7 is dealing with our death to law in terms of the victory of grace over condemnation. In Paul's analogy, we are both the woman who was formerly bound to the law (v. 3) and we are also the husband who dies to the law (v. 4). We are dead to the law only in the sense that we are dead to the curse it pronounces over sinful humanity.

The law did not die nor was it supplanted. That is a logical impossibility given by God and the law is an extension of Himself. It is a revelation of His character and standard of righteousness. There was nothing wrong with the law and no reason for it to be abrogated. The law did not change. It is we who are changed and transformed and are empowered by God's grace to obey the Lord's commandments from the heart.

We DO NOT obey the Law - we CANNOT obey the Law. We HAVE DIED to the Law and we walk BY FAITH IN JESUS and HIS SPIRIT produces fruit in and through us that fulfills the Law.

We cannot obey the law in our own strength; at least, not in a way that truly pleases God. We DO obey the law in the power of the Holy Spirit. It is Jesus in us in the Person of the Holy Spirit who fulfills the righteousness of the law (Rom. 8:4).

There is no way to define faith, love, holiness, the fruit of the spirit without God's law.

[lekh l'kha]

"

Behold, the days come, says Jehovah, that I will cut a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah, not according to the covenant that I cut with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which covenant of Mine they broke, although I was a husband to them, says Jehovah;" (Jer.31: 31-32)

It is NOT a "renewed" covenant - it is a totally NEW covenant. The covenant based on obedience to the Law God gave to Moses when He "took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt" was God's marriage-contract with Israel which they broke .

The New Covenant is a completely NEW marriage contract.

Actually it is a renewed covenant. The term "New Covenant" which Jeremiah uses in chapter 31 is "Brit Hadashah." Dashah in Hebrew meas to renew, with a view to improving upon the former. Jesus used the same term in reference the New Covenant cut in His blood.

So God renewed and "improved upon" the covenant that was broken by the Israelites. So we have nothing more than a broken covenant.

Well then we are of all people the most pitiable, because A BROKEN COVENANT IS NO COVENANT AT ALL.

"In that He says, A new covenant, He has made the first one old. Now that which decays and becomes old is ready to vanish away." (Heb 8:13)

Edited July 27, 2009 by lekh l'kha

[lekh l'kha]

Lek you make complete sense and it is all there in the Word.

Not that it will make any difference. They can't even make a definition of their own terms. Apparently the law = any rules, suggestions, commandments, attributed to God.

But I know you mean the Mosaic law.

This would have been a two page thread if there were some definitions laid down.

"In that He says, A new covenant, He has made the first one old. Now that which decays and becomes old is ready to vanish away." (Heb 8:13)

This thread kinda reminds me of "Hath God indeed said...."

But I'm not surprised. This is going on in all churches, in all Christian Forums, and is leading the church away from the one and only true gospel.

"The Law and Grace" is nothing other than another "gospel" which is no gospel at all.

Edited July 27, 2009 by lekh l'kha

[canuckamuck]

Lek you make complete sense and it is all there in the Word.

Not that it will make any difference. They can't even make a definition of their own terms. Apparently the law = any rules, suggestions, commandments, attributed to God.

But I know you mean the Mosaic law.

This would have been a two page thread if there were some definitions laid down.

"In that He says, A new covenant, He has made the first one old. Now that which decays and becomes old is ready to vanish away." (Heb 8:13)

This thread kinda reminds me of "Hath God indeed said...."

But I'm not surprised. This is going on in all churches, in all Christian Forums, and is leading the church away from the one and only true gospel.

"The Law and Grace" is nothing other than another "gospel" which is no gospel at all.

Indeed

I have seen two churches split over this in the last two years, and the side which picked to live in the joy of their salvation are on fire and adding members weekly.

Those who prefer judgment and condemnation, are bitter and lifeless. I also know another church that has come under law doctrine and it is nothing like it was. Very sad indeed.

Of course I am also sure there are imbalances towards grace as well, but personally I haven't seen it hurt anyone's walk.

Edited July 27, 2009 by canuckamuck

[mizzdy]

If Yeshua had broken the laws He in no way could have qualified to become the perfect sacrifice. Walking through the fields and eating the wheat?, Yeshua is our high priest, He did nothing wrong by eating and giving to others. It is lawful to do good on the Sabbath

Wolf

Yet its against levitical rabinical law... Yes He did break their law

But He kept the law of God that stood in Adams day and stands now

While I agree Adam and Eve were under G-d's protection and yes they did have laws, one being to guard the midst of the garden, we are not privy to what exactly it entails. We know Abraham kept G-d's laws, commandments and statues and that was before Moses, so is the law the same? I believe it was. In Due. 23:25 in a list of misc. laws we read that it is lawful to eat from your neighbors grapes as well as 'plucking' the heads of the grain, as long as no one used a basket to do so. So no the levitical law says its perfectly fine to eat just as Yeshua and His disciples did. The oral law is what they believed He was breaking which is not levitical law. I do not think that Adam and Eve had all the Mosaic laws, there was no need there were no large populations to contend with nor other idols, at least we are not told there were at that time. G-d gave all those statues and commandments to a new nation, a new peoples who had been under bondage, who kept other gods and they needed to have a set of laws and such to follow in order to become the nation G-d knew they could be.

[precepts]

How do you define sin if not for the law?

[Yahsway]

very good question precepts. If the Law is done away with, how do we define Sin?

[lekh l'kha]

The law was given as a schoolmaster to bring you to Christ - because it makes you and me and all the world guilty Law-breakers before God.

God only sees us in respect of two people: The first Adam, and the last Adam.

The first Adam sinned and the Law was necessary to make him aware of his condition. But it could not bring life, and could never bring life to Adam.

The last Adam perfectly obeyed and fulfilled the Law, died for our Law-breaking, rose again and now represents all those who are in Him before God.