| Author | Message | ||
| Bskillet Registered user Username: Bskillet Post Number: 522 Registered: 8-2008 |
I have a quick question based on something I just noticed in Romans 7 for the first time. We were all told that we had to observe the Law (actually, just the 4th commandment) as Christians because Paul said the Law was "holy and just and good." But when I read Paul's words in Romans 7:9-12, I find this:
Paul elsewhere says, "Through the law I have died to the law, that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ; and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me" (Gal 2:19-20). The Law brought him to see his utter need for grace, for a savior ("Who will save me from this body of death?"). Through the Law, he died to the Law. He was crucified with Christ. The Law demonstrated his condemnation, so that he came to see his need for Jesus and believe in Him. So if I am understanding Romans 7:9-12 correctly, using Paul to interpret Paul, he is saying that the Law is "holy and just and good" BECAUSE it caused him to see his need for a salvation apart from the Law. Isn't that the very essence of Rom 3:19-24: Thus, we "establish the Law" by the Gospel because the Law finds its place as the "ministry of condemnation" God uses to demonstrate to man that he needs the Gospel. Consequently, the holiness, justness, and goodness of the Law is derived from its use in pointing to the Gospel. The holiness, justness, and goodness of the Law is derived from the greater holiness, justness, and goodness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Consequently, the Law is subservient to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, not superior to it. Law serves the greater purpose of Grace. Grace does not serve the greater purpose of Law. Funny, for so long I was told the exact opposite. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 10268 Registered: 12-2003  |
Exactly, Brent. I've been studying Romans intently for a few months, and I've come to the same conclusion. The law was always intended to show us we are depraved. It was never give to show us how to live! The law was what revealed we are dead and hopeless. It is holy because it is from God, and it serves God's purpose to reveal our utter innate sinfulness. That's it's purpose! Colleen | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 5370 Registered: 9-2006  |
Yes, if a person claims the law, which Adventist do, you can use that to show his total need for grace and total need for total atonement. This is the Adventist Achilles heel. River | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 1765 Registered: 4-2000  |
Without any doubt, Paul is clearly referring to the Ten Commandments in Romans 7:7--even citing the Tenth Commandment. The Law reveals our divine standard, and as believers compare themselves against that standard, they can accurately identify sin, which is the failure to meet the standard. Paul uses the personal pronoun "I" throughout the rest of the chapter, using his own experience as an example of what is true of unredeemed mankind (vv. 7-12) and true of Christians (vv. 13-25). Moreover, Paul's use of present tense verbs in verses 14-25 strongly supports the idea the he is describing his life currently as a Christian. The good news is that no sin a believer can commit--past, present, or future--can be held against him, since the penalty was paid by Christ and righteousness was imputed to the believer. And no sin will ever reverse this divine legal decision. Importantly, we don't have freedom to do what God's Law forbids but freedom from the spiritual liabities and penalties of God's holy and unchangeable Law. Dennis Fischer | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 460 Registered: 3-2009 |
Colleen says:
I remember that one of the arguments of the validity of the law is that the law is a mirror. It shows us how dirty we are. We don't break the mirror to clean ourselves, we go to Jesus. However, SDAs do use the law as an instrument that shows us how to live. But the mirror shows us how dirty we are, but it cannot show us how to stay clean. Therefore the mirror analogy breaks up at that point. The law is good like the mirror to show us how dirty we are so we can go to Christ to be clean, but the law, like the mirror cannot keep us or even show us how to stay clean. Hec | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 1766 Registered: 4-2000 |
Hec, Although the believer is no longer in bondage to the moral law's condemnation and penalty, the law still reflects the moral character of God and His will for His creatures. But what the external, written code was unable to accomplish, the Spirit is able to do by writing the law on our hearts (Jer. 31:33,34) and giving us the power to obey it. Romans 8:4 affirms that "walk" refers to a lifestyle, the habits of living, and thinking that characterize a person's life. Since every true Christian is indwelt by the Spirit, every Christian will manifest the fruit He produces in his life (Gal. 5:22,23). Dennis Fischer | ||
| Bskillet Registered user Username: Bskillet Post Number: 524 Registered: 8-2008 |
I would agree, so long as the moral law means the two commandments behind the Torah, to love God and love others. We cannot decided "this is moral," and "this is civil," and "this is ceremonial," in the Torah, because we would be foisting our own concepts on Scripture where the Bible gives us no right to. These distinctions began with Thomas Aquinas, who sought to re-build Christian theology on pagan Aristotelian philosophy, rather than on the Scriptures. Some commands from the Law are re-iterated in the New, some are drastically altered, some are abrogated, and some new commands are given that were not in the Torah. The New Covenant Christian is responsible for the commands given by Jesus and the Apostles. The alternative, trying to figure out by our own human classification schemes which Torah commands apply and which do not, is substituting our own understanding in the place of Scripture. We are under the Law of Christ, which includes some of the old Law, excludes some Torah commands for a multitude of reasons, modifies some Torah commands, and includes some new ones. | ||
| 8thday Registered user Username: 8thday Post Number: 1135 Registered: 11-2007  |
Tried to show this to an sda relative - from scripture in the NT - the purpose of the Law. Nearly accused of blasphemy. They can do nothing but go back to the promises to Israel when the Law was given. You have to be crazy to think you can earn the blessing and avoid the curse. That is indeed the whole point. | ||
| Bskillet Registered user Username: Bskillet Post Number: 525 Registered: 8-2008 |
No, more like you have to be a normal, fleshly, prideful human being to think you can earn the blessing and avoid the curse. The Law came to demonstrate to man that he could achieve goodness by his own efforts. | ||
| Pegg Registered user Username: Pegg Post Number: 235 Registered: 2-2006 |
I agree, Brent. I am also waiting for clarification from Dennis. Pegg  | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 10271 Registered: 12-2003 |
The entire Bible reflects God's will for His creatures. The law is certainly part of God's revelation. The point is that the new covenant has introduced a new way of serving God. As Paul says in Romans 7:5-6, "For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death. But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter." I think Dennis is speaking from the perspective of "covenant theology" which understands the law to have these three uses on a continuing basis: "1. To restrain external evil (civil use) or (curb). 2. To show us our sin (pedagogical, theological, or elenchtical [convicting] use) or (mirror). 3. To show us God's character and will as a rule and guide to holy living, empowered by the Gospel alone (didactic use) or (rule)." The "three uses of the law" are especially discussed and upheld in the Lutheran and Reformed traditions. Dispensational churches and new covenant theologians understand the function of the law differently. Our understanding at LAM is that the the New Testament clearly explains that the Lord Jesus fulfilled the law, and we know and serve God in a more demanding and complete way than the law affords. The law is not gone; it is not bad or sinful or unnecessary. Rather, it is FUFILLED. The Author of the law IS our law. He holds us accountable to every single moral requirement the law demanded—plus much more. Even the Sabbath the Lord Jesus expects of us—He asks us to enter His rest TODAY (Hebrews 4). He asks us to surrender every moment and decision and temptation to Him. We no longer measure our behavior by the written law, although that is helpful; rather, we answer to God Himself. The differences in the understanding of the uses of the law, however, should never be a factor to divide the body of Christ. True Christians are found in all three "theologies" as well as many that fit in between those three. My personal understanding of the new covenant is that the law is fulfilled in Jesus, and whenever Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts, as 2 Cor 3:7-18 explains. That is not to say that we shouldn't read Moses! That just means that we look to Jesus, not to Moses, for our relationship with God! Colleen | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 1767 Registered: 4-2000 |
The Bible remains God's voice speaking to us. Clearly, the Bible leaves no stone unturned to define sin for us by providing specific examples of sins (yes, actual lists) in both the Old and New Testaments. We don't have to wonder what God expects from us as His adopted children. Likewise, Adam and Eve didn't have to wonder what God expected of them in the Garden of Eden either. There was no second guessing. It was all spelled out in great detail. After all, the Holy Spirit breathed or inspired the entire Bible from Genesis to Revelation. "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness" (2 Tim. 3:16 ESV). While the New Testament is a later, clearer, and final revelation to man, it does NOT supersede the OT canon (reread 2 Tim. 3:16 again). Specific lists of sins transcend all covenants in Scripture (i.e., the clear prohibition of "murder" in the Noahic, Mosaic, and New Covenants). The same God was involved in all the covenants. So, it should not startle us to find a distinct commonality among the covenants--notably in ethics. Believers are not led through subjective, mental impressions or promptings to provide direction in making life's decisions--something Scripture nowhere teaches. Instead, God's Spirit objectively leads His children sometimes through the orchestration of circumstances (Acts 16:7) but primarily through: (1) illumination, divinely clarifying Scripture to make it understandable to our sinful, finite minds; and (2) sanctification, divinely enabling us to obey Scripture (Gal. 5:16,17;5:25). When a person experiences the Spirit's leading in those ways, he gains assurance that God has adopted him into His wonderful family. Paul uses the phrase "righteous requirement of the law" (Romans 8:4). The thoughts, words, and deeds which the moral Law of God demands. The ceremonial aspect of the Mosaic Law has been set aside (Col. 2:14-17), and the basic responsiblity for the civil aspect, which shows the application of the moral law in a community, has been transferred to human government (Rom. 13:1-7). The moral law finds its basis in the character of God and is presented in outline form in the Ten Commandments; its most condensed form is in Jesus'commands to love God and to love one's neighbor as one's self. Its substance has never been abrogated, but finds its authority in the New Covenant. Every unbeliever is still under its requirement of perfection and its condemnation, until coming to Christ (Gal. 3:23-25) and every believer still finds it the standard for behavior. Believers are always "fruit" bearers (Gal. 5:22,23). The ethics of the OT law remain the ethics of the NT gospel. As Christ was not a sinner, but was treated as if He were, so believers who have not yet been made righteous (until glorification) are treated as if they were righteous. He bore their sins so they could bear His righteousness. God treated Him as if He committed believer's sins, and treats believers as if they did only the righteous deeds of the sinless Son of God. What an awesome Savior and Substitute! Dennis Fischer PS: On another note, I met a retired minister/missionary today at church who has read the Bible completely through 70 times. He told me that he was challenged by Charles Spurgeon having read the Bible through 93 times. I had never before met a person who read the entire Bible through 70 times. Talk about making me feel inadequate in my Bible reading! Spurgeon taught that "from every text in the Bible there is a road to Jesus Christ." Supposedly, at an average reading speed, one can read the entire Bible in just 72 hours. --DJF (Message edited by Dennis on August 23, 2009) | ||
| Pegg Registered user Username: Pegg Post Number: 238 Registered: 2-2006 |
Dennis, it sounds like you are saying that viewing the Old Testament through the lens of the New is similar to the way that SDA views Scripture through the lens of Ellen White. "It is from the standpoint of the light that has come through the Spirit of Prophecy (Mrs. White’s writings) that the question will be considered, believing as we do that the Spirit of Prophecy is the only infallible interpreter of Bible principles, since it is that Christ, through this agency, giving real meaning of his own words." (from the tract The Mark of the Beast, p. 1, G. A. Irwin, General Conference President)I am certain you would like to clarify. Pegg | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 1768 Registered: 4-2000 |
Pegg, Thank you for your question. The OT canon can fully stand on its own divine inspiration. It is complete and trustworthy by itself. It doesn't require the NT to define it. In other words, the OT is not somehow less God-breathed or inspired than the NT canon. Both canons are God-breathed and to be fully used according to the standard of 2 Timothy 3:16. Dennis Fischer | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 467 Registered: 3-2009 |
Dennis, I don't want to offend you. So please do not get offended. My question is: What is the difference between your explanation and the explanation of the SDAs? Hec | ||
| Pnoga Registered user Username: Pnoga Post Number: 276 Registered: 1-2007  |
We have to remember that in 2 Timothy 3:15 Paul states that the scriptures Timothy has known since infancy is to make you wise into Salvation through faith in Christ Jesus, than in 3:16 Paul states that all scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, reproof, correction and for training in righteousness. Since we know that it is by the righteousness of Christ, than all scripture is profitable for correcting us, pointing out our sin and than pointing us to the righteousness of Christ so we can be cleansed by His blood and made right with God through the faith of Christ. John 5:31-47 Jesus spoke to the Jews saying that God has testified (witnessed) about Jesus and He clearly states that the scriptures (Moses,Law, prophets) are God's testimony. than in verses 39-40 Jesus states that "you search the scriptures thinking that in them you will find eternal life, but they are that which testify of Me" and the Jews were not willing to come to Him for eternal life. Paul in Romans 10:1-4 states that the Jews had a zeal for God but not according to God's righteousness, which they disregarded and attempted to establish their own through works of the law, they have not submitted to God's righteousness which is Christ, Paul states that Christ is the culmination (Telos= The point aimed at, the end goal, the conclusion, the result)of the law, for everyone who believes. Jesus stated in Matt 5:17-18 that he came to fulfill the law (pleroo= level up, cram up, satisfy, execute, finish, verify, accomplish, fill up, etc) So Jesus is the telos of the law. So all scripture is profitable to point out our sin and lead us to God's mercy through the righteousness He has revealed to us in Jesus Christ. Without Jesus we have no hope,and the Old Testament would only reveal our sin and the condition and tell us that God has mercy on us and will redeem, but without Jesus and the cross and the witness of the New Testament I fear we would most likely end up as the Old Covenent Jews trying to establish our own righteousness, because doing the law was the way to life and the promise given to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It is evident that we could not fulfill the law to receive the promise, hence deserve the curses prescribed in the law. But Jesus came to fulfill the law to credit us the promise by Faith in Him and at the same time take the curse we deserve, for breaking the law. We are no longer under the law, so trying to keep it only puts us back under it, and we fall from grace. (Galatians 5:3-4). We must live by the Spirit given to us not by the law. Paul (Message edited by pnoga on August 23, 2009) | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 10276 Registered: 12-2003 |
Neither I nor any of us at LAM believe the NT supercedes the OT. Where there are ambiguities or apparent discrepancies, however, the NT interprets the OT because Jesus is the fuller, complete revelation of the Father. The promises and prophecies and shadows of the Messiah have been fulfilled in Jesus; we can't begin to "interpret" them fully without looking backward through the lens of the NT. Using the NT to interpret the shadows of the OT does not mean the NT supercedes the OT. On the contrary, the OT is fully able to stand alone with what it says. We just don't fully "see" the extent of some of its meaning without seeing Jesus and then looking backward. Paul over and over quoted OT prophecies and commented that various new covenant events fulfilled them—and the fulfillments were often different from what the OT Jews would have expected. But nothing supercedes the OT, just as my adopted sons do not supercede my early dreams for family. My sons realize and fulfill my dreams, but the dreams were real and anticipated a reality I couldn't have guessed. "Interpreting" is very different from "superceding". Colleen | ||
| Pnoga Registered user Username: Pnoga Post Number: 277 Registered: 1-2007 |
Colleen, I agree with what you said. I really like the way you explained it through the example of your adopted sons. Great. Paul | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 1769 Registered: 4-2000 |
If we believe that the OT canon is completely dependent upon the NT for interpretation, then it obviously has an inferior or lesser inspiration. This is one of the new, theologically-liberal ideas within the last thirty years that expands the movement of historical criticism. It goes against everything taught on the subject in the last two thousand years. Let us not be as biased as the early SDA pioneers who rejected everything the Catholics believed as heresy--including the Trinity doctrine. Likewise, let us not be so biased and closed-minded that we see absolutely no truth in anything that official Adventism teaches. We should be objective and give credit where credit belongs. Let's face it! If everything that Seventh-day Adventists believe is 100 percent wrong then nobody would be deceived by it. The best counterfeits are those closest to the original. The Ten Commandments form the beginning of the biblical canon. The Hebrew Scriptures were the only Bible Jesus and his apostles had. Theologically, the New Testament is based upon the Old Testament canon. Ultimately, God is the author of all Scripture.
Dennis Fischer (Message edited by Dennis on August 24, 2009) | ||
| Seekinglight Registered user Username: Seekinglight Post Number: 348 Registered: 3-2009 |
I'm not a theologian, but it makes more sense to me for the Substance to interpret the shadows rather than the other way around. |
