Law Vs Grace, or Law AND Grace?

[lekh l'kha]

NO. It's not a renewed covenant.

Sorry, but the fact that the Bible uses "Brit Hadashah" means it is. You may not like it, but its the truth, and no amount of ranting will change it.

It was broken by the people and needed replacing. Jesus said the only grounds for divorce is adultery, and Israel broke the marriage-contract. A NEW covenant was needed, and God graciously provided a NEW covenant. Hadashah does not mean "renewed". It means "renewal" - as in something completely new - replacing the old - like a new day and like the new heavens, new earth and new Jerusalem.

Sorry, but I read and speak Hebrew. Dashah is word used to describe the recurrence of the seasons each year. It is also a word used to refer to the resharpening of the dull edge of sword. As used by Jeremiah, it means to renew the covenant that was broken. It certainly does not mean to replace or abrogate God's law.

Can't you see how you're contradicting yourself, Shiloh? Every new season is a completely new season - it does not "renew" the old season. Each day is a completely new day - it does

not "renew" yesterday. As used by Jeremiah, "hadashah" means renewal in the sense of something replacing what preceded it.

Well you are wrong, the seasons are renewed. It is a cycle of renewel. God does not recreate a new set of seasons every twelve months. The same cycle of renewel goes on and on. In addition, I also gave the word picture of the resharpening of the dull blade of a sword.

Jeremiah is talking about a new adminstration, a new covenant. If you note what Jeremiah does not say is that God is establishing a new law. It is a new adminstration where the same law is administered in a different manner. The focus is on the way it will be better than what preceded it.

By renewel, I am not saying God is rehashing the same Old Covenant. The Old Covenant proved the impotence of human effort to arrive at God's standard of righteousness. That is what it was designed to do. God had to first prove that man is incapable living up to God's standard, not mention satisfying God's justice.

The New Covenant is not the same Old Covenant in a new suit. The elements are the same as before, as I have stated. There is still blood, a sacrifice and a High Priest, but all three pertain to and are met in Jesus.

The problem in this debate Lekh Lekha, is that you are trying to refute arguments that have not been raised. You assigning values to my comments that I am not trying to communicate. You are essentially putting the lie in my mouth and arguing against it. It is a very immature approach to debate and to be frank it is getting really old.

O.K, Shiloh. I will try and see where it is I have put "the lie into your mouth" and then argued against it. Perhaps I've misunderstood you on a few things you've said.

Nevertheless, the Word of God speaks for itself. It means what it says. And the Word of God says two things in one book about that covenant of Law which you say has been renewed:

(1) "For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord." (Heb 8:7-9); and

(2) "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)

Your debate in this thread has been that the Law which was part and parcel of that covenant which according to Heb.8: 13 God has made old, has only been "renewed".

This can only mean that each and every one of its 613 (or whatever the number is) commands and prohibitions must still apply.

And if I understand you correctly, you say the only thing that has changed, is the way it is obeyed or applied.

If the covenant of Law has been renewed, then we can't separate the 10 commandments or the 2 commandments that sum up the Law (the command to love the LORD our God with all our heart, mind, soul and strength, and our neighbor as ourselves), and say that only these commandments and Laws still apply - because the entire covenant of Law has been renewed, according to what you have been saying here.

The truth is that the Word of God is true, and the Covenant of Law has been replaced by a new and better covenant, so that the Law is written on our hearts and the Spirit of Christ produces the fruit in us that fulfills the 10 commandments or the 2 commandments mentioned above, upon which the 10 commandments and entire Law hinge.

The reason for this is because we cannot sanctify ourselves as the Law commands, because we cannot work righteousness of our own self-effort, because we cannot obey the Law of our own self-effort, and our righteousness is as filthy rags in the sight of God - He will not even touch it and will not come near it, and will not allow us to bring it near Him.

Christ is our righteousness - the only One who perfectly obeyed and fulfilled the Law.

This is why we have to die to our self-effort and to our (self)-righteousness, which is our attempts to sanctify ourselves - in other words, we die to the Law, because the Law does not bring us life and cannot bring us life, since the Law condemns us and brings us into death.

And this is why the New Covenant does not renew that covenant of Law - it replaces it with a new covenant based on a new Way - a way of being sanctified by the Spirit of the One who is and always will be "THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS"

In other words, it is our faith in Christ and His righteousness alone that sanctifies us, and NOT "The Law AND grace", which is the position of the OP of this thread, and which position you have been defending all along.

If the Law has been renewed as you say, then the letter to the Hebrews would not say:

"For the priesthood being changed, there is of necessity a change made in the law also." (Heb 7:12)

Edited July 28, 2009 by lekh l'kha

[canuckamuck]

Fantastic!

[Guest shiloh357]

O.K, Shiloh. I will try and see where it is I have put "the lie into your mouth" and then argued against it. Perhaps I've misunderstood you on a few things you've said.

Thank you. It is much appreciated.

Nevertheless, the Word of God speaks for itself. It means what it says. And the Word of God says two things in one book about that covenant of Law which you say has been renewed:

(1) "For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord." (Heb 8:7-9); and

(2) "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)

Your debate in this thread has been that the Law which was part and parcel of that covenant which according to Heb.8: 13 God has made old, has only been "renewed".

No, that is not my argument. My argument is that God has renewed (repaired) a broken relationship.

This can only mean that each and every one of its 613 (or whatever the number is) commands and prohibitions must still apply.

And if I understand you correctly, you say the only thing that has changed, is the way it is obeyed or applied.

No because if you had read what I posted previously in this thread, you would note that I have continuously and unambiguously argued that the only part of the law that is universal in application is the ethical/moral commandments.

I have argued that while the entire law is universally relevant in terms of the lessons and moral/spiritual instruction we can glean from it, it is not universally applicable. I have also made the point that some of the commandments only applied to Israel and even then only under a certain dispensation and not under the dispensation we are living today. I have only ever argued for a limited applicability where the law is concerned.

If the covenant of Law has been renewed, then we can't separate the 10 commandments or the 2 commandments that sum up the Law (the command to love the LORD our God with all our heart, mind, soul and strength, and our neighbor as ourselves), and say that only these commandments and Laws still apply - because the entire covenant of Law has been renewed, according to what you have been saying here.

Jesus' point in calling those the greatest commandments was that they define the whole of the law. More to the point, it is the law that defines what love is and shows us what love looks like. The law shows us what loving God looks like: We don't take His Name in vain, we don't build idols, we place Him first in our lives. The law also shows us what loving our neighbor looks like: We don't don't steal from them or covet their possessions or lust after their spouse, etc. Biblical love spoken of in the NT is defined by the law and is expanded upon in the NT. The NT draws off of the law of Moses, because the Law of Moses IS the law of love, according to Jesus.

The reason for this is because we cannot sanctify ourselves as the Law commands, because we cannot work righteousness of our own self-effort, because we cannot obey the Law of our own self-effort, and our righteousness is as filthy rags in the sight of God - He will not even touch it and will not come near it, and will not allow us to bring it near Him.

I have not been arguing that we can sanctify ourselves. That again goes back to what I said earlier. You are trying to refute arguments that have not been raised.

Christ is our righteousness - the only One who perfectly obeyed and fulfilled the Law.

This is why we have to die to our self-effort and to our (self)-righteousness, which is our attempts to sanctify ourselves - in other words, we die to the Law, because the Law does not bring us life and cannot bring us life, since the Law condemns us and brings us into death.

And this is why the New Covenant does not renew that covenant of Law - it replaces it with a new covenant based on a new Way - a way of being sanctified by the Spirit of the One who is and always will be "THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS"

I have not been talking about a renewal of the "covenant of law" as you call it. What I am talking about is the renewal of a covenant relationship. The New Covenant is a renewed covenant in that we see all of the same elements pertaining redemption as I have pointed out before.

The Law of God is eternal and is still alive and well. The New Covenant does not abrogate God's law. God's law is perfect, just, holy and good. There is no fault with it whatsoever. The problem was man's impotence to keep God's law to the standard God demands. The New Covenant, does not remove the standard, but enables us to be pleasing to God by having the righteousness the law demands fulfilled in us by the Holy Spirit.

In other words, it is our faith in Christ and His righteousness alone that sanctifies us, and NOT "The Law AND grace", which is the position of the OP of this thread, and which position you have been defending all along.

Law and grace are not mutally exclusive terms and the Bible does not treat them as such. The Law of God is the standard of righteousness God demands. Grace doe not abrogate or remove the standard but enable's us to meet that standard and it is also grace that provides forgivenss and another chance when we stumble. In the Bible, grace and law complement each other.

[Guest shiloh357]

Which is still rooted in the OT. There is not ONE NT ethic that is not found in the OT. The NT is in part, an illumination on the OT. It expands upon it and explains it. Everything Jesus taught was based on the law of Moses, and He quoted extensively in all of His teachings.

The law is at odds with the NT. The NT is very Torah-positive.

I am not doubting it is rooted in the OT, I am saying that I am not bound by the law of Moses or any other OT laws.

where is the part in the NT about not wearing clothing made of mixed fabrics?

Where is the part in the NT about stoning our children for being rebellious?

Trying to find obscure commandments doesn't really help your argument. For one thing, the commandment was not to mix linen and wool and was not a commandment agaisnt "mixed fabrics" in general. Both that commandment and the commandment stone children were for a particular dispensation and the part about stoning children only applied to Israel when Israel was a theocracy.

The NT makes constantly reference to the Law of Moses and our obedience to it. You will not find ONE Christian ethic in the NT is that not already contained in the Law of Moses. You cannot live as Christian and NOT keep the law of Moses. More to the point, the NT does not make us less responsible to obey God's laws. It makes us more responsible in fact, not only are we to obey God's laws, but according to the NT there should not be anything in our heart that would cause us to disobey it in the first place.

[lekh l'kha]

I have not been talking about a renewal of the "covenant of law" as you call it. What I am talking about is the renewal of a covenant relationship. The New Covenant is a renewed covenant in that we see all of the same elements pertaining redemption as I have pointed out before.

The Law of God is eternal and is still alive and well. The New Covenant does not abrogate God's law. God's law is perfect, just, holy and good. There is no fault with it whatsoever. The problem was man's impotence to keep God's law to the standard God demands. The New Covenant, does not remove the standard, but enables us to be pleasing to God by having the righteousness the law demands fulfilled in us by the Holy Spirit.

Grace doe not abrogate or remove the standard but enable's us to meet that standard and it is also grace that provides forgivenss and another chance when we stumble. In the Bible, grace and law complement each other.

I partly agree with you. But our own efforts to meet the standard (through obedience to the Law) = self-righteousness, and our righteousness is as filthy rags in the sight of God. He will not touch it or come near it, and He will not allow us to bring it near Him, because it is stained with our sin.

We have to die to our self-effort: "through the Law, I died to the Law, that I might live to God" (Gal.2: 19).

And the Law is nothing more or less than the expression of that standard you are talking about.

Grace does not enable us to meet the standard. Grace is the Spirit of Christ in us meeting the standard, by delivering us from the power of sin and sanctifying us, and producing the fruit of the Spirit in and through us which fulfills the Law.

It has NOTHING to do with our works or with us meeting the standard - it is ALL God's work of redemption and of salvation and of sanctification. It is not God's work + our efforts at righteousness.

Neither is it a license for us to continue in sin - because when we die to self-effort, self-righteousness and to the Law, we die to sin and live unto God - just as Christ died to sin after he became sin for us, and lives unto God:

"At that day you shall know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you." (Joh.14: 20)

"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." (John 15: 5)

[precepts]

hanuck's

We define sin by the Holy Spirit who lives in us, and the law which is written on our hearts. (not Mosaic law) We know what is sin, and some things that are sin are not even covered by the law, it is about our relationship with God and neighbor. Sometimes a simple comment can be sin, even though it breaks no Mosaic law.

Simply asking this question is very telling of what people can't understand of the new covenant.

Mosaic law was (sin for dummies) Now we have the programmer of righteousness working right along with us. It is better.

Do you know that fencing in all of your property is a sin? Do you know that the earth is polluted by sin that causes famine, droughts, etc.? Action speaks louder than words. we are wheat planted amidst a cursed earth, a nation within a cursed nation that pollutes the earth because they don't know how to walk in God's statues. It's only by our fruits will we be known in the harvest.

canuck's

Yes, progressive revelation. That is why in our improved covenant, we have more clarity than when we forced to remember all the tenants of the book of the law. Because sin is a condition of the heart, it is in our hearts where we find the definition of sin, That is if we listen to what the Spirit tells us. Incest will be wrong in your heart every time, unless you have a seared conscience. But what about not giving someone some encouragement when you see the are troubled, what about driving a little slower so someone can merge. What about staying home with your kids instead of doing something for yourself. Where is Moses on all of that. We know what the law says by the days when we lived by the letter. We know that the law could still allow you to live selfishly. Now we have the Mind of Christ. it is better.

The biggest misunderstanding of the law vs grace issue is that it was the whole law (involving sacrifice, circumcision, etc.) vs the new covenant that they were referring to. When paul spoke of not keeping the law he was referring to the whole law. That's why when he went to Jerusalem he had to santicfy himself in the temple.

canuck's

However we determine our behavior by seeking the Holy Spirit, by keeping step with the Holy Spirit. I have said way back in this thread that the law is perfect, it is man that is flawed. That is why we fail by the letter of the law.

We failed by the law because of the sacrifices that had to be made constantly but now we have a better everlasting covenant and sacrifice.

canuck's

Jesus is demonstrating that man's interpretation of the law can be flawed, even by the experts. He even shows them how they themselves would break their interpretation of the law in various situations. The point being that the book of the law until that point had been applied by men who are prone to error. By their error they created religious traditions that were self serving and against God's plan for righteous interpersonal relationships. As can be seen in His disapproval of the Pharisees handling of the law

If the Pharisees were experts in the law they wouldn't be in error. The reason Christ ask if there was any good in Israel when he met Nataniel was the history of Israel after the 2nd temple era.

The letter of the law leads to man's indulgence because it is processed through the filter of the flesh. But when the law is processed through the filter of the Spirit. It results in righteous activity. Avoid the letter of the law, rely on God's Holy Spirit which He has given you for this purpose.

canuck 2:4. The letter of the law was good enough for them in the old testament or else it wouldn't of been instituted. Edited July 28, 2009 by precepts

[WolfBitn]

Are you an aussie my friend? lol its 11:30 pm here in kentucky usa

I am a true canuck, but I live in Thailand currently. I live beside an Aussie though. They talk funny.

Theres no doubt they were abusing the law but they have no effect on the law standing or falling, or whether ite relevant or not

I must disagree; abuse and misinterpretation of the law is inherent because of man's sin nature. This has an incredible effect on the law, because its application results in unrighteous behavior. The words of the law were unchanged by the pharisees, but the application was in the wrong spirit. This is why the letter is death to man, but the Spirit is life. We need the Holy Spirit or God must destroy us.

Ive been through ontario... loved it, most especially the smaller towns, the coffee shops and little delis, pubs...

Canuck, the only problem i see here is that i dont see any law regarding healing on the sabbath that could have been misinterpreted

[lekh l'kha]

The biggest misunderstanding of the law vs grace issue is that it was the whole law (involving sacrifice, circumcision, etc.) vs the new covenant that they were referring to. When paul spoke of not keeping the law he was referring to the whole law. That's why when he went to Jerusalem he had to santicfy himself in the temple.

The letter of the law was good enough for them in the old testament or else it wouldn't of been instituted.

The biggest misunderstanding of the law vs grace issue is that the Law is only a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. Jesus does not need to refer those He indwells (and in whom He writes His Law) to the written Law found in a book called the Old Testament. He convicts the heart of His disciple - because that's where His Law is written - not in a book called the Old Testament:

"At that day you shall know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you." (Joh.14: 20)

"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." (John 15: 5)

It's not the branch bearing fruit and living up to the standard of the Law - it's the Vine bearing fruit through the branch and fulfilling the Law.

Once the written Law has served its purpose and brought a person to Christ, it can be dispensed with, since it now becomes written in the heart by the Living Law-giver - and that is exactly why we are told:

"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)

There are now only three covenants that remain: The eternal covenants of grace which are based solely on the faithfulness of God to His Word: The Abrahamic Covenant, the Davidic Covenant, and the New Covenant.

Edited July 28, 2009 by lekh l'kha

[canuckamuck]

Do you know that fencing in all of your property is a sin? Do you know that the earth is polluted by sin that causes famine, droughts, etc.? Action speaks louder than words. we are wheat planted amidst a cursed earth, a nation within a cursed nation that pollutes the earth because they don't know how to walk in God's statues. It's only by our fruits will we be known in the harvest.

Really, and how many of those wheat sprouts do you know are following the letter of the law without error? Are you one of them?

Precept:

The biggest misunderstanding of the law vs grace issue is that it was the whole law (involving sacrifice, circumcision, etc.) vs the new covenant that they were referring to. When paul spoke of not keeping the law he was referring to the whole law. That's why when he went to Jerusalem he had to santicfy himself in the temple.

Paul had to be purified to enter the temple or he would have been killed. In fact it didn't work, and they wanted to kill him anyways for teaching gentiles not to follow the whole law, and he was arrested.

canuck's

However we determine our behavior by seeking the Holy Spirit, by keeping step with the Holy Spirit. I have said way back in this thread that the law is perfect, it is man that is flawed. That is why we fail by the letter of the law.

Precept

We failed by the law because of the sacrifices that had to be made constantly but now we have a better everlasting covenant and sacrifice.

You think men failed the law because they couldn't keep up with the sacrifices. Please get me some scripture that indicates that.

canuck's

Jesus is demonstrating that man's interpretation of the law can be flawed, even by the experts. He even shows them how they themselves would break their interpretation of the law in various situations. The point being that the book of the law until that point had been applied by men who are prone to error. By their error they created religious traditions that were self serving and against God's plan for righteous interpersonal relationships. As can be seen in His disapproval of the Pharisees handling of the law

Precept:

If the Pharisees were experts in the law they wouldn't be in error. The reason Christ ask if there was any good in Israel when he met Nataniel was the history of Israel after the 2nd temple era.

If the pharisees were not the experts in the law, tell me please who was?

The letter of the law leads to man's indulgence because it is processed through the filter of the flesh. But when the law is processed through the filter of the Spirit. It results in righteous activity. Avoid the letter of the law, rely on God's Holy Spirit which He has given you for this purpose.

Precept:

canuck 2:4. The letter of the law was good enough for them in the old testament or else it wouldn't of been instituted.

The letter of the law failed, hence the sacrifice of Christ. The law was instituted so man could see the need for a savior, as well as demonstrating righteous interaction.

If the law was good enough then, why did Jesus pay a visit?

[canuckamuck]

Canuck, the only problem i see here is that i dont see any law regarding healing on the sabbath that could have been misinterpreted

They were asking him if it was lawful to heal on the sabbath. Which they were trying to twist into an admission he was breaking the laws about working on the Sabbath.

An attempt to trap him by the law. Wrong motivation and manipulation of the intent of the law was why Jesus only got mad at the Pharisees.

The law was clearly abused by the Pharisees, not in word, but in interpretation and application.

Edited July 28, 2009 by canuckamuck