Jesus Fulfilled the Law
We are no longer under the law because Jesus came to fulfill the law and He stated that once the law was fulfilled, it would pass away.
"Think not that I AM COME to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but TO FULFILL. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till ALL BE FULFILLED." Matthew 5:17-18
"For Christ is the END OF THE LAW for righteousness to every one that believeth." Romans 10:4
"In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to VANISH AWAY." Hebrews 8:13
"Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He TAKETH AWAY THE FIRST, that he may establish the second." Hebrews 10:9
"For there is verily A DISANNULLING OF THE COMMANDMENT going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof." Hebrews 7:18
What does it mean to "not be under" the law? For the law to have ended? To have been abolished? To have passed away? To vanish away? To be taken away??? To be disanulled??
I really don't see how any stronger or clearer language could be used. How can anyone look at these verses and still contend that ANY of the law is the governing authority for Christians today?
Consider this as well:
"Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter." Romans 7:1-6
Do we really hear what the Scriptures are saying here? We are either betrothed to God via the old covenant of the new covenant. It is only one or the other.
In fact, trying to stay faithful to the law and at the same time be faithful to Jesus makes one an adulterer God says. You cannot be married to Jesus Christ if you are still married to the law.
Those who tell you that you must be still under the law are leading you into spiritual adultery.
I don't want to get sidetracked here, but it is so important that people who place themselves under the law understand the fullness of what God says in the matter.
Spirit of the Law Series
The Spirit of the Law – Part 1, Are Christians Under the Law?
The Spirit of the Law – Part 2, What the New Testament Says About the Law
The Spirit of the Law – Part 3, Jesus Fulfilled the Law
The Spirit of the Law – Part 4, Christians Must Still Follow the Ten Commandments
The Spirit of the Law – Part 5, God Says “Keep My Commandments”
The Spirit of the Law – Part 6, All of God's Commandments
The Spirit of the Law – Part 7, Love, the Fulfillment of the Commandment
The Spirit of the Law – Part 8, The Law Has Been Magnified
The Spirit of the Law - A Summary
Shalom LDM,
ReplyDeleteConcerning your comment: "I really don't see how any stronger or clearer language could be used." You make the letters of Paul out to be so easy to be understood whereas Peter said that they are "hard to be understood". If Peter is correct, then what that tells me is that the average person will not have a correct understanding of statements like "not under the law", "dead to the law", "free from the law", etc. Remember, Peter also said that those that were "unlearned" and unstable wrest Paul's writings. Unlearned in what? Unlearned in the "old covenant" scriptures, which was the "bible" of the early believers.
Hello Bro. Don,
ReplyDeleteLet's examine what the text actually says.
"Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. " Peter 3:14-16
First, let us notice that no where in that Chapter is Peter addressing the law specifically. So the correlation that the hard things to understand address Paul's writings about the annulling of the law are assumptions you are making.
Second, it should also be seen that Paul's letters are referenced here as Scripture. So, the church was very much aware that these writings (which would eventually make-up our New Testament) held the strength of Scripture.
Third, Peter describes the people who are wrestling with Paul's letters are also wrestling with the other Scriptures. So, that speaks more to the Jews, as they believed that salvation was found in obeying the letter of the law. This is what blinded them in part to receiving Christ - like the Scripture says, to their own destruction.
I do not make Paul's letters out to be easily understood. If there is any understanding imparted therein, it is because the Lord has given light through the power of His Holy Spirit.
Surely you don't mean to imply that when the Holy Spirit imparts understanding it must by default be false because it is understood?
Indeed, the only reason there is ever any confusion about Scripture is when the mind of man cannot receive what the Spirit says to the churches.
Shalom LDM,
ReplyDeleteIs it not Paul's statements concerning the law that have caused more controversy than any of the other apostolic writings? Has not the subject of law vs. grace been one of the most heated theological battles in the history of the "church"? I do not believe that it is a reach to say that at the very least, his statements about the law are included in II Pet. 3:16.
"Surely you don't mean to imply that when the Holy Spirit imparts understanding it must by default be false because it is understood?"
Not at all, however, if the average sinner on the street fully embraces your interpretation of "not under the law", "dead to the law", "free from the law", and rejects mine, it does raise an eyebrow. It is the carnal mind that is not subject to the law of the Most High, right? By saying this, I am not saying that you are carnally minded. I believe, from reading your other writings, that you are a spiritually minded brother who has a misunderstanding concerning the relationship of the law and the Spirit. That is all.
Hello Bro. Don,
ReplyDeleteYou misunderstand. I did not say his statements about the law were not included. I stated that your contention of the annulment of the law being what was misunderstood in his writings was your assumption.
As I stated earlier, it is those whose understanding of Scripture prevented them from receiving Christ to their destruction (according to Paul) who were being referenced here; and those were the Jews.
Which makes perfect sense, because the Jews are the only ones who would find a stumbling block in the putting aside of the law.
Come on now, LDM.
ReplyDeleteHow can you be so sure that the "Jews" are who Peter had in mind here when he said that they were "unlearned"? To the contrary, they were very learned in the scriptures, they were just ever learning and never able to come to a knowledge of the truth.
Remember, the charge toward Paul was that he taught the Hebrews amongst the Gentiles to forsake circumcision and the customs of Moses, which he did not. Because of this charge, he was falsely accused of making grace a license for sin ( see Rom. 3:8 ). What I am saying is that people today likewise are making Paul out to be giving license to transgress the laws of the Most High. The difference is that people today enjoy that interpretation whereas the "Jews" of that day were enraged over it.
Hello Bro Don,
ReplyDeleteIf one is not able to come to a knowledge of the truth, then one IS unlearned. No matter how much one studies, if you do not perceive what is being taught, the learning is for naught.
All the studying of Scripture in the world should have allowed them to see Christ, but they could not.
"And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not. Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." John 5:38-39
Jesus is speaking above to the Jews. Why would He tell them to search the Scriptures, when as you acknowledge they were entrusted with the Scriptures and knew of them well? Because they had not yet come to understand the truth of them; they were as yet still unlearned about the meaning therein.
No one was struggling with the Scripture to their destruction but the Jews who were entrusted with them, but whose understanding (or lack thereof) was contributing to their blindness in Christ.
So as to ensure that others are not confused, I need to clarify something.
ReplyDeleteBro Don above stated:
"Remember, the charge toward Paul was that he taught the Hebrews amongst the Gentiles to forsake circumcision and the customs of Moses, which he did not."
I addressed this in another set of comments and wish to share that here so as to be clear.
***
"For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a CHANGE also of the law." Hebrews 7:12
"In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to VANISH AWAY." Hebrews 8:13
The entire book of Hebrews is filled with Paul's discussion of the law and it's relation to believers in Christ - and this was written to the Jews.
"But now WE ARE DELIVERED FROM THE LAW, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter." Romans 7:6
Who was serving in the oldness of the letter? It surely wasn't the Gentiles, but the Jews.
"For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus HATH MADE ME FREE FROM THE LAW of sin and death." Romans 8:2
Is not Paul a Hebrew of Hebrews? Yet, He is made free from the law.
"For Christ is the END OF THE LAW for righteousness to EVERY ONE that believeth." Romans 10:4
Are not Hebrews included in "every one"?
There are many texts, and a number of them are covered in this series. Remember, there is neither Jew nor Gentile in Christ but all are under one covenant for God has made of them both one new man.
Shalom again LDM,
ReplyDeleteAs much as I would like to comment, I will maintain my integrity with you. I only ask that you explain your theory that Paul taught the Hebrew brethren the forsake circumcision and the customs of Moses within the context of Acts 25:8 and Acts 28:17.
I also recently gave an audio lesson called "The Apostles and the Torah", but I will respect the boundaries and not post the link. It addresses some of the things that you posted. Perhaps I may share it with you personally someday.
Hello Bro Don,
ReplyDeleteSure. There are numerous verses where Paul speaks about the annulling of the law for those in Christ, and either directly and indirectly to the Jews, as I have shown above. So, that is not theory.
However, in answering your questions:
"While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all." Acts 25:8
"And it came to pass, that after three days Paul called the chief of the Jews together: and when they were come together, he said unto them, Men and brethren, though I have committed nothing against the people, or customs of our fathers, yet was I delivered prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans." Acts 28:17
As I mentioned in another post, you cannot violate that for which you are not subject.
Neither can one use false logic to try and create Scriptural doctrine where there is none. By that, I mean that you cannot say that since he did not violate the law, he must have been subject to keeping it. I have never violated the laws of England, however neither am I subject to such.
There is not one Scripture which says that the Torah is the governing authority for believers. Instead Paul says that the covenant engraved in stone (the 10 commandments) as symbolized by the bond woman must be cast out and will not be heir with the free woman. Believers in Christ are children of the free.
http://thelatterdays.blogspot.com/2009/07/spirit-of-law-part-4.html
Shalom LDM,
ReplyDeleteJust writing to let you know that I appreciated our exchange, and I appreciate you as an individual. I, like yourself, believe that I am being led by the Spirit into all truth. At the very least, I am encouraged to see from your other posts on other subjects that you are taking a bold stand for righteousness to the best of your understanding, even as I am to the best of my understanding.
Shifting gears, I do a weekly podcast wherein I deal extensively with the subject of spiritual abuse in church leadership, which I believe does not get enough attention. Do you have any blogs that deal with this subject?
Hi Bro Don,
ReplyDeleteI believe that we are each called to stand for the truths God has shown us, even as we only see now darkly. Such is certainly my goal, and I appreciate your sincerity in striving for the same.
In terms of spiritual abuse in church leadership, nothing immediately comes to mind, although I have certainly addressed specific leaders and some particular problems in the church. You would probably find more discussion about that on the message board. Here are a few:
http://thelatterdays.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=doctrine&action=display&thread=263
http://thelatterdays.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=doctrine&action=display&thread=104
http://thelatterdays.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=doctrine&action=display&thread=167