PDA

View Full Version : The Law: pt #2



herald
Dec 12th 2008, 08:44 PM
"Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful. But his delight is in the law of the Lord; and in His law doth he meditate day and night." Ps 1:1,2

"The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes. the fear of the Lord is clean, enduring forever: the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than the honey and the honeycomb. Moreover by them is Thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward." Ps 19:7-11

"The law of God is in his heart; none of his steps shall slide." Ps 37:31

"I delight to do Thy will, O my God: yea, Thy law is within my heart." Ps 40:8; Jer 31:31-34; Heb 8:10 (Under the New Covenant, the Lord engraves His Covenant in our hearts and minds. That is why Jesus said, that, if a man looks upon a woman to lust, he has, already, committed adultery with her in his heart.)

"Give ear, O My people, to My law: incline your ears to the Words of My mouth." Ps 78:1. (Again, the law is compared with His Word.)

"Blessed is the man whom Thou chastenest, O Lord, and teacheth him out of Thy law." Ps 94:12

"As far as the east is from the west, so far hath He removed our transgressions ("of the law" 1 John 3:4) from us...TO SUCH AS KEEP HIS COVENANT AND TO THOSE THAT REMEMBER HIS COMMANDMENTS TO DO THEM." Ps 103. (Covenants have conditions.)

"Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the Lord...Open Thou my eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of Thy law." Ps 119:1,18

"Remove from me the way of lying: and grant me Thy law graciously...Give me understanding, and I shall keep Thy law: yea, I shall observe it with my whole heart." Ps 119:29,34

"So shall I keep Thy law contiually forever and ever...Horror hath take hold upon me because the wicked forsake Thy law." Ps 119:44,53

"Let Thy tender mercies come unto me, that I may live: for Thy law is my delight...O how I love Thy law! It is my meditation all the day." Ps 119:77,97

"I hate vain thoughts: but Thy law do I love...It is time for Thee to work: for they have made void Thy law." Ps 119:113,126

"DO WE THEN MAKE VOID THE LAW THROUGH FAITH? GOD FORBID: YEA, WE ESTABLISH THE LAW." Rom 3:31

"Rivers of water run down my eyes, because they keep not Thy law...Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and Thy law is Truth." Ps 119:136,142

"I have longed for Thy salvation, O Lord; and Thy law is my delight." Ps 119:174

"For the commandment is a lamp; and the law is light; and reproofs of instruction are the way of life." Pro 6:23

"Keep My commandments and live; and My law as the apple of thine eye." Pro 7:2

"The law of the wise is a fountain of life, to depart from the snares of death." Pro 13:14

"THEY THAT FORSAKE THE LAW PRAISE THE WICKED: BUT SUCH AS KEEP THE LAW CONTEND WITH THEM." Pro 28:4

"For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity (LAWLESSNESS) and idolatry...1 Sam 15:23

Jesus said, "He that rejecteth Me and receiveth not My Words, hath one that judgeth him:the Word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day." John 12:48

"Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: FOR SIN IS THE TRANSGRESSION OF THE LAW." 1 John 3:4

The Apostle Paul wrote, "For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: AND AS MANY AS HAVE SINNED IN THE LAW SHALL BE JUDGED BY THE LAW; FOR NOT THE HEARERS OF THE LAW ARE JUST BEFORE GOD, BUT THE DOERS OF THE LAW SHALL BE JUSTIFIED." Rom 2:12,13

His Word/His law will judge each one of us. Do you want His Word/His law to judge you?

Or, to hear Him say, "Well done, thou good and faithful servant?"

"But unto the Son He saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of Thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity (LAWLESSNESS): therefore God, even Thy God, hath anointed Thee with the oil of gladness above Thy fellows..." Heb 1:8,9

"And being made perfect, He became the author of eternal salvation, unto all them that obey Him." Heb 5:9

"Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have RIGHT to the tree of life, AND MAY ENTER IN through the gates into the city." Rev 22:14 (Again, Covenants have conditions.)

mikebr
Dec 12th 2008, 09:27 PM
3:1 Are we beginning again to commend ourselves? Or do we need, as do some, letters of commendation to you or from you?

3:2 You are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read by all men;

3:3 being revealed that you are a letter of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tablets of stone, but in tablets that are hearts of flesh.

3:4 Such confidence we have through Christ toward God;

3:5 not that we are sufficient of ourselves, to account anything as from ourselves; but our sufficiency is from God;

3:6 who also made us sufficient as servants of a new covenant; not of the letter, but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

3:7 But if the service of death, written engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the children of Israel could not look steadfastly on the face of Moses for the glory of his face; which was passing away:

3:8 won't service of the Spirit be with much more glory?

3:9 For if the service of condemnation has glory, the service of righteousness exceeds much more in glory.

3:10 For most assuredly that which has been made glorious has not been made glorious in this respect, by reason of the glory that surpasses.

3:11 For if that which passes away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory.

3:12 Having therefore such a hope, we use great boldness of speech,

3:13 and not as Moses, who put a veil on his face, that the children of Israel wouldn't look steadfastly on the end of that which was passing away.

3:14 But their minds were hardened, for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains, because in Christ it passes away.

3:15 But to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart.

3:16 But whenever one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.

3:17 Now the Lord is the Spirit and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

3:18 But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord, the Spirit.

herald
Dec 12th 2008, 09:44 PM
The, only law that was fulfilled was the Ceremonial law: Circumcision is now of the heart, washings are baptism, Jesus, the clean became unclean so that we may be clean. The Sabbath Feast Days were fulfilled:

PASSOVER: Our Passover Lamb
UNLEAVENED BREAD: He was without sin
TABERNACLES: He "tabernacled among us"...

If the Ceremonial had not been fulfilled, we would, still, sacrifice animals.

CEREMONIAL LAW:

1. Is called, "the law contained in ordinances." Eph 2:15
2. Was spoken by Moses. Lev 1:1-3
3. Was written by Moses in a book. 11 Chron 35:12
4. Was placed in the side of The Ark. Deut 31:24-26 (to show it's temporal nature
5. Was nailed to the cross. Col 2:14
6. Was abolished by Christ. Eph 2:15


THE TEN COMMANDMENT COVENANT:

1. Is called the "royal law" Ja 2:8
2. Was spoken by God. Deut 4:12,13
3. Was written with the finger of God. Ex 31:18
4. Was placed inside The Ark. Ex 40:20; Heb 9:4
5. Is to "stand forever and ever." Ps 111:7,8
6. Was not destroyed by Christ. Mt 5:17,18

The Ten Commandment Covenant deals with our character and is used by the Holy Spirit in our on-going process of sanctification. The Holy Spirit will never lead us into sin, or, "The transgression of the law." 1 John 3:4

In Psalm 119, the word, "Word," is used interchangeably with, "law," "commandments," "statutes," "precepts," judgments," "testimonies."

HIS WORD = HIS LAW

That is why the Apostle Paul wrote, "...For not the hearers of the law are just before God, BUT THE DOERS OF THE LAW SHALL BE JUSTIFIED." Rom 2:12,13

"A new heart also will I give you and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

And I will put My Spirit within you, and CAUSE YOU to walk in My statutes, and ye shall keep My judgments and do them." Ezek 36:26,27

When we have His Spirit within us, we are empowered by His Spirit to keep His Word/His law. That is what "walking in His Spirit" is all about.

Jesus said, "He that hath My commandments and keepeth them, he it is that loveth Me: and he that loveth Me shall be loved of My Father, and I will love him, and will manifest Myself to him." John 14:21

You, certainly, are not saying, that, you can bow down and worship other gods, take His name in vain, profane His holy day, dishonor your parents, murder, commit adultery, steal, bear false witness, covet and walk with a holy God? That would be blasphemous.

Even in heaven, the Lord makes quite a statement about His Covenant:

"And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in His temple The Ark of His Testament: and there were LIGHTNINGS, and VOICES, and THUNDERINGS, and AN EARTHQUAKE, and GREAT HAIL." Rev 11:19

"Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have RIGHT to the tree of life, AND MAY ENTER IN through the gates into the city." Rev 22:14

mikebr
Dec 12th 2008, 10:15 PM
The, only law that was fulfilled was the Ceremonial law: Circumcision is now of the heart, washings are baptism, Jesus, the clean became unclean so that we may be clean. The Sabbath Feast Days were fulfilled:

What do you believe was carved in stone.

But if the service of death, written engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the children of Israel could not look steadfastly on the face of Moses for the glory of his face; which was passing away:

herald
Dec 12th 2008, 10:47 PM
The Old Covenant was The Ten Commandment Covenant. Deut 4:13;Ex 34:28. It was based upon the promise of the people. Ex 24:7. The New Covenant is based upon the promise of God:

"But this shall be the Covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; after those days, saith the Lord, I will put My law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people." Jer 31:31-34;Mt 26:28; Heb 8:10 - AN INTERNAL COVENANT.

THE OLD COVENANT = THE NEW COVENANT

WHO is He speaking of? Paul answers, "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made, He saith not, And to thy seeds as of many: but as of one, And to thy seed which is Christ." "And IF ye be Christ's, then are YE Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." Ga 3:16,29

"Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham." Ga 3:7

"For he is not a Jew, who is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh: BUT HE IS A JEW, WHICH IS ONE INWARDLY; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God." Rom 2:28,29

The promises were made through Abraham to the children of promise (Rom 9:6-8), who are justified by faith - whether Jew or Gentile.

"Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

And ye know that He was manifested to TAKE AWAY OUR SINS; and in Him is no sin.

Jesus said, "Not every one that SAITH, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but he that DOETH the will of My Father, which is in heaven.

MANY will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in Thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

And then will I profess unto them, I NEVER KNEW YOU: depart from Me, ye that work iniquity (LAWLESSNESS). Mt 7:21-23

"And hereby we do know that we know Him, IF we keep His commandments. He that saith, I KNOW HIM and keepeth not His commandments, is a LIAR and the Truth is not in him: BUT WHOSO KEEPETH HIS WORD, IN HIM VERILY IS THE LOVE OF GOD PERFECTED: hereby we do know that we are in Him." 1 John 2:3-5

Whosoever ABIDETH IN HIM (walks in His Spirit) sinneth not: ("the transgression of the law" 1 John 3:4) whosoever sinneth hath not seen Him nor KNOWN HIM.

Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as He is righteous.

He that committeth sin (1 John 3:4) is of the Devil; for the Devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose was the Son of God manifested, that he might destroy the works of the Devil.

Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for His seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the Devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother." 1 John 3

When we walk in the power of His Spirit, we do not sin. It is when we fall back on the old ways, that we sin.

"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I love; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me." Ga 2:20

"What shall we say then? Shall we CONTINUE IN SIN that grace may abound? God forbid. HOW SHALL WE, THAT ARE DEAD TO SIN LIVE ANY LONGER THEREIN?" Rom 6:1

The Apostle Paul wrote, "Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas (Peter); and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?" 1 Cor 1:12,13.

In Revelation 17, the Lord calls the denominational system, "The Mother of harlots." She has traded much of the Word of God for her traditions.

"And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, COME OUT OF HER, MY PEOPLE, that ye be not partakers of her sins ("the transgression of the law" 1 John 3:4) and that ye receive not of HER PLAGUES (Interesting).

For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities." (LAWLESSNESS) Rev 18:4,5

How do we "Come out?" By doing as the Bereans: "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they RECEIVED THE WORD with all readiness of mind, SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES DAILY, whether those things were so." Acts 17:11

Just as in the Garden, it is a question of allegiance. Either our allegiance is to God's Word, alone, or, to the harlot system.

When what is taught in my church doesn't line up with Scripture, I speak up. Some like it, others don't.

The Apostle Paul wrote to Timothy, ""I thank God whom I serve from my forefathers with PURE CONSCIENCE..." 2 Tim 1:3.

I serve the Lord with a pure conscience, and trust the Holy Spirit to reveal anything to me that I need to repent of...that is what sanctification is all about.

crossnote
Dec 13th 2008, 07:32 AM
O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
(Gal 3:1-3)

For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
(Gal 3:10-13)

herald
Dec 13th 2008, 12:41 PM
And when we walk in His Spirit, He fulfills the law through us. That is what "walking in His Spirit" is all about. The Holy Spirit will never lead us into sin, or, "the transgession of the law." 1 John 3:4.

According to Mk 16:17,18, I have cast out demons, healed the sick, and in a group of three, raised a man from the dead. Not by my might or power, but, by His Spirit being released through me.

Romans 16:26 refers to "the obedience of faith." Without obedience there is no true faith.

"Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law." Romans 3:31

So, are you saying, that we can bow down and worship other gods, take His name in vain, profane His holy day, dishonor our parents, murder, commit adultery, steal, bear false witness, covet and walk in His Holy Spirit? That is blasphemous.

If you break any of the Ten Commandments, you are a transgressor of His law, and will not enter into the kingdom. James 2:10,11 tells us, that, if we break any of His commandments, we become transgressors of His law and are guilty of breaking all of them.

Jesus said, "Not every one that SAITH, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but he that DOETH the will of My Father, which is in heaven.

MANY will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Thy name? and in Thy name have cast out devils? and in Thy name done many wonderful works?

And then will I profess unto them, I NEVER KNEW YOU: depart from Me, ye that work iniquity. (lawlessness) Mt 7:21-23

"And hereby we do know that we know Him, IF WE KEEP HIS COMMANDMENTS. He that saith, I KNOW HIM, and keepeth not His commandments is a LIAR and the Truth is not in him: BUT WHOSO KEEPETH HIS WORD, IN HIM VERILY IS THE LOVE OF GOD PERFECTED: hereby we do know that we are in Him." 1 John 2:3-5

Jesus said, "If ye love Me, keep My commandments." John 14:15

Jesus said, "He that hath My commandments and keepeth them, he is is that loveth Me, and he that loveth Me shall be loved of My Father, and I will love him, and will manifest Myself to him." John 14:21

His Church keeps His commandments: "And the Dragon was wroth with the woman and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ." Rev 12:17

His saints keep His commandments: "Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus." Rev 14:12

At the very end of the Book of all books, the Apostle John wrote, "Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have RIGHT to the tree of life, AND MAY ENTER IN through the gates into the city." Rev 22:14

herald
Dec 13th 2008, 01:25 PM
When Moses struck the rock, twice, God charged him with unbelief. Num 20:12, because he disobeyed the Word of God.

Unbelief = Disobedience
Faith = Obedience

God said to Abraham, "And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and I will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations be blessed.

BECAUSE that Abraham obeyed My Voice (God's Word) and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws." Gen 26:4,5

"Even so, faith if it hath not works is dead, being alone.

Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith and I have works: shew me thy faith withut thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe and tremble.

But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

Was not Abraham our father, (Ga 3:7,29) JUSTIFIED BY WORKS, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? (Because he was obedient to God's Word)

Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and BY WORKS was faith made perfect?

And the Scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed (FAITH) God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness: and he was called the friend of God.

Ye see then how that BY WORKS a man is justified, AND NOT BY FAITH ONLY...

For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." James 2

kenrank
Dec 14th 2008, 06:32 AM
O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
(Gal 3:1-3)

For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
(Gal 3:10-13)

The Galatians were coverted pagans who were falling back into their old PAGAN ways. As it says in your last few lines...Messiah redeemed us from the curse of the Law (DEATH, separation from God) not from obeying God.

Peace.
Ken

crossnote
Dec 14th 2008, 06:45 AM
Right, no one said we are to disobey God. But our righteousness before God is not based on our righteousness(which is flawed) it is a gift given based on the perfect obedience of Christ Jesus. Our good works flow from faith in Christ and His Gospel as fruit grows from abiding in the vine.

I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
(Gal 2:20-21)

kenrank
Dec 14th 2008, 07:06 AM
Right, no one said we are to disobey God. But our righteousness before God is not based on our righteousness(which is flawed) it is a gift given based on the perfect obedience of Christ Jesus. Our good works flow from faith in Christ and His Gospel as fruit grows from abiding in the vine.

I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness comeby the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
(Gal 2:20-21)


Crossnote, you are 100% right. We not not declared righteous by being obediant, but we are justified.

Rom 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

In the same way that we have to get out of the habit of assuming the Sinai covenant and Torah (Law) are the same thing (Abraham kept God's Torah and commandments LONG before Sinai- Gen 26:5), we need to make sure we don't look at justification and righteousness as the same thing, they are not. They are two entirely different things.

Peace and blessings.
Ken

herald
Dec 14th 2008, 01:32 PM
Amen. If He did not die for us, we would never be justified.

He saves us, sets us free from sin, and empowers us to walk in His Spirit.

He gives us the power to obey His Word/His law. Again, that is what "walking in His Spirit" is all about. When we "abide in Him" we do not sin.

Vhayes
Dec 14th 2008, 03:37 PM
The Galatians were coverted pagans who were falling back into their old PAGAN ways. As it says in your last few lines...Messiah redeemed us from the curse of the Law (DEATH, separation from God) not from obeying God.

Peace.
Ken
Paul specifically mentions the "Party of circumcision" - do you think he was referring to pagans when he wrote that descriptor?

herald
Dec 14th 2008, 04:24 PM
Outward circumcision dealt with the Ceremonial law. That law was fulfilled and abolished on the cross. Col 2:14

"For he is not a Jew, who is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God." Rom 2:28,29

MJH
Dec 15th 2008, 05:00 AM
we need to make sure we don't look at justification and righteousness as the same thing, they are not. They are two entirely different things.
Ken

Ken,
We almost always agree, but in Greek and in English there is only one word for justification and righteousness. We use two words to translate the one Greek (or Hebrew) word because we can't say, "righteous-i-fied" in English.

We are declared righteous, or just, by faith in the One who was faithful. But we are declared to be righteous-i-fied (Justified) by living out the commands, which are now written on our hearts.

Similar to Abraham, who was declared righteous because he believed God, but God also says in Gen 18:19,

"For I have known [have covenant relationship with] him, that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the LORD by doing righteousness and ordinances, so that the LORD may bring to Abraham what he has promised him."

Abraham was declared righteous because he believed God,(Gen 15:16) and then God says, in order that I may bring on Abraham that which I have spoken of him....I will have a covenant with him that his family may keep the way of the LORD and do righteousness and judge rightly.

So after Abraham has faith and is declared righteous, God puts His Torah in His heart so that he may do righteousness.

It is as if God is saying, "I promised to bless Abraham, but I can not bless anyone who is not walking in my ways, so I am going to have a covenant with Him and ensure that he keeps the way of the Lord."

Of course later, we see in Gen 26:4-5, which you quoted yourself, that Abraham does obey, and "because he obeys" God blesses him.

Faith, then Torah, then blessings.

Was Abraham in the New Covenant as we are today? I know I asked this before, but I think (not convinced entirely) that he was due to Hebrews 11, and the fact that we enter the New Covenant by the same faith as Abraham. It only makes since that, while the blood of the covenant had yet to be shed, he was a part of it through faith and if so, then the Torah would be written on his heart in much the same way as it is for us today.

I apologize if I am behind on this thread too. I only read your one post and since I like what you say, I thought I'd pipe in. I am new to this forum and one thing I don't care for is the layout. Post are simply linear, and it is heard to follow the many sub topics in a thread. I prefer a branch/three/root type thread that allows sub-topics to branch off rather than simply putting every post one after the other based on time. I was on the Paul and law thread and when I came back, 4-5 pages of post were added. I can't keep up with that.

MJH

MJH
Dec 15th 2008, 05:11 AM
Outward circumcision dealt with the Ceremonial law. That law was fulfilled and abolished on the cross. Col 2:14


The text you quote:

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;"

The word which in this translation is ordinances, is the word dogma in Greek. The Greek word "dogma" never refers to any commands given by God. They are always man made rules, usually not very good ones.

We can see the same Greek word in this same passage translated later....

Col 2:21-23 "If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations[DOGMA]-- "Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch" (referring to things that all perish as they are used)--according to human precepts and teachings? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh."

Clearly nothing in this section could be connected with God's Law.

Your main point may or may not have value, but the text you use does not support your conclusions. Col 2:14 can not be speaking of a so-called ceremonial law, nor any other part of God's law.

MJH

MJH
Dec 15th 2008, 05:23 AM
Paul specifically mentions the "Party of circumcision" - do you think he was referring to pagans when he wrote that descriptor?

The letter was written to pagans who left pagan ways and accepted faith in Jesus. This can be seen mostly in the later parts of the letter. This letter also had an audience of Jews who accepted faith in Jesus.

The party of circumcision would have been Jewish members who held to the prevailing theology of their day that Gentiles could only join the covenant people by going through a ritual process of conversion and becoming Jewish in religion and ethnicity. This theology can be read even today by reading the extant texts from that period and soon after. Paul was very clear that salvation was not granted by going through some ritual works of the law, but through the same faith as Abraham who was declared righteous BEFORE he was circumcised.

There were many walls set up to keep Gentiles and Jews separate that had nothing to do with the written Law of God. These were "added" laws and as Deut 4:2 and 12:32 say, adding laws is against the law. Paul torn down these additional laws, especially since they were preventing the blessings of God from coming to all the nations.

MJH

kenrank
Dec 15th 2008, 05:35 AM
Paul specifically mentions the "Party of circumcision" - do you think he was referring to pagans when he wrote that descriptor?

V...what verse is that? I did a search under "party of circumcision" and found nothing. I assume if it is a verse, it isn't in the KJV which is all I can search in. Thanks.

Peace.
Ken

kenrank
Dec 15th 2008, 05:43 AM
Outward circumcision dealt with the Ceremonial law. That law was fulfilled and abolished on the cross. Col 2:14

"For he is not a Jew, who is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God." Rom 2:28,29

Herald, I love to discuss scripture, even when we don't agree. But we should try to keep the terms we use as scriptural. "Ceremonial Law" is not in scripture. It is a term applied by some to deal with actions like circumcision. Paul took part in what you would call the "ceremonial law," as seen in Acts 21:26. This is directly from Numbers 6, also called the "vow of a nazirite." Paul also quoted the (obsolete?) Law in his defense and even denied teaching against Torah before his accusers. I will post those verses if you are interested.

As for Col. 2...if you go back and read it you will not see the word "law" being nailed to the cross. If the "law" was nailed to the cross, done away with...that Messiah lied when he said earth would pass away before the Law would. (earth is still here) It was a few things nailed to the cross, condemnation, our separation from God, death, sin. Go back and read the first 14 verses of Col 2 again in that light, I am sure you will see that, the context is clear.

Peace to you.
Ken

kenrank
Dec 15th 2008, 05:53 AM
MJH, thanks for the post. First, I did not realize the Greek used the same word for justified and righteous. How unfortunate. It does the same for Law (nomos), which again is unfortunate, for when it speaks of the Law of YHWH or the Law of man...the same word is used and we have to rightly divide the Word to discern the meaning. I often wonder if YHWH allowed this so that we have to work a little to be blessed with knowledge. Having the one word for righteous and justified shows though, that Greek and Hebrew are NOT perfect counterparts when it comes to translation. I hold to the belief that most (not all) of the NT was written in Hebrew intially and then translated to Greek) Clearly justified and righteous carry different meanings...and it actually puts the texts at odds with itself if you read it only in Greek. For in one place it says we are made righteous (
dikaios) by faith, but then justified (dikaios) by works.

You add much to these boards MJH. I hope you continue to bless me with your presence!

Peace.
Ken

kenrank
Dec 15th 2008, 06:00 AM
The text you quote:

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;"

The word which in this translation is ordinances, is the word dogma in Greek. The Greek word "dogma" never refers to any commands given by God. They are always man made rules, usually not very good ones.

MJH

That's a great point I left out in my post to herald. Shaul did the same thing in Ephesians.

Eph 2:14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

What he abolished, aside from the condemnation of death is the man made laws that placed a wall between the Jews and the gentiles. Jews not eating with gentiles, walking a certain amount of steps on Sabbath...and many other examples of man made additions to God's will. The enmity this brings up between man and man, and man and God, is what was "done away with." (in short)

Peace.
Ken

herald
Dec 15th 2008, 11:54 AM
It may not be called, "The Ceremonial law," but it is in the Scripture...it was fulfilled and completed on the cross.

God said to Abraham, "And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven...

BECAUSE that Arbaham obeyed My voice (God's Word), and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws." Gen 26:4,5

"Even so, faith if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe and tremble.

But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

Was not Abraham our father, JUSTIFIED BY WORKS, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar (in obedience to the Word of God)?

Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and BY WORKS was faith made perfect?

And the Scripture was fulfilled which saith, ABRAHAM BELIEVED (faith) GOD, and it was imputed to him for righteousness: and he was called the friend of God.

Ye see then how that BY WORKS a man is justified, AND NOT BY FAITH ONLY...

For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." James 2.

There is no true faith without obedience to God's Word.

MJH
Dec 15th 2008, 12:47 PM
The Ceremonial law is in Scripture...it refers to the law of Moses, which was terminated at the cross. Again, if it had not been, we would, still, sacrifice animals.

I think you may have skipped over my response to your comment on Col. 2:14 and what was nailed to the cross. It was a good comment and worth reading.

Ceremonial law (what we classify as ceremonial law) is in Scripture, this is true. However, the term and the separation between what we term as ceremonial law vs. moral law is not found in scripture. Not only does the Bible not divide the law into two or three parts, there has never been an attempt by a serious Bible scholar that I know of to find one.

Those who divide the law do so not because it is mentioned in scripture, but because they infer it to be so based on their reading of Scripture, mainly the book of Hebrews.

You mentioned that the Laws given through Moses and the ceremonial law are the same. I've never heard anyone classify all of the law given through Moses as ceremonial. Did you miss type, or did I read you right?

We do not offer sacrifices primarily because there is no Temple. It is against the Law of God to have them elsewhere.

Saved by grace through faith in Jesus, and Jesus alone.

God bless,
MJH

herald
Dec 15th 2008, 12:54 PM
"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me..." Ga 2:20

"What shall we say then? Shall WE CONTINUE IN SIN that grace may abound? God forbid. HOW SHALL WE THAT ARE DEAD TO SIN LIVE ANY LONGER THEREIN?" Rom 6:1.

Jesus died to set us free from sin.

According to Matt 7:21-23, it is not what we SAY, but what we DO.

So, are you saying, that, we can bow down and worship other gods, take His name in vain, profane His holy day, dishonor our parents, murder, commit adultery, steal, bear false witness, covet and walk in His Spirit?

James 2:10,11 tells us, that, of we break any of His Commandments, we become transgressors of His law and are guilty of breaking all of them.

MJH
Dec 15th 2008, 01:13 PM
it actually puts the texts at odds with itself if you read it only in Greek. For in one place it says we are made righteous (
dikaios) by faith, but then justified (dikaios) by works.



I'm not sure that the Greek would be as bad with dikaios as it is with nomos. I am not a Greek scholar nor student, so I am too weak in this area to speak definitively. I do not believe that Greek speakers would be confused as to which meaning was carried in context. It's just that in English we are limited in our use of righteousness. We can not use that term as a verb, but in Greek and Hebrew, you can use dikaios or tzadik as a verb or adjective or noun.

With nomos, we are not talking about using a different English word based on the word usage (verb, noun, adjective) but we are confused as to which law is being spoken of.

As far as the NT being written in Hebrew: I have studied this too. Biven and Blizzard give compelling arguments. I have concluded that regardless of what language was the original copy, these things are true: 1) The disciples and Jesus spoke Hebrew as their primary language. 2) Paul was fluent in Hebrew and was likely his native tongue or at least on par with his native tongue. 3) regardless of the they wrote in, they would still need to translate from Hebrew to Greek either while they were writing, or soon afterwards.

We do have the received Text in Greek, however, and that's our base. While understanding Hebrew and how one might translate back into Hebrew can aide our study and expand it, it shouldn't ever change the meaning given in the received Text.

That all being said, my guess is that Matthew and Hebrews are the top picks for being written in Hebrew first, then translated.

MJH

MJH
Dec 15th 2008, 01:15 PM
So, are you saying, that, we can bow down and worship other gods, take His name in vain, profane His holy day, dishonor our parents, murder, commit adultery, steal, bear false witness, covet and walk in His Spirit?

To whom are you asking this question?

MJH

herald
Dec 15th 2008, 01:17 PM
Kenrank...there is a distinction in the law.

The Ceremonial law was fulfilled on the cross. The Ten Commandment Covenant is, still, in effect.

kenrank
Dec 15th 2008, 03:49 PM
It may not be called, "The Ceremonial law," but it is in the Scripture...it was fulfilled and completed on the cross.

God said to Abraham, "And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven...

BECAUSE that Arbaham obeyed My voice (God's Word), and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws." Gen 26:4,5

"Even so, faith if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe and tremble.

But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

Was not Abraham our father, JUSTIFIED BY WORKS, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar (in obedience to the Word of God)?

Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and BY WORKS was faith made perfect?

And the Scripture was fulfilled which saith, ABRAHAM BELIEVED (faith) GOD, and it was imputed to him for righteousness: and he was called the friend of God.

Ye see then how that BY WORKS a man is justified, AND NOT BY FAITH ONLY...

For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." James 2.

There is no true faith without obedience to God's Word.

Unless I am mistaken, we are agreeing here except for any part of the law being nailed to the cross. Like I said, Paul took the vow of a Nazirite in Acts, after the ascension. If you want to use the word ceremonial, there is nothing any more ceremonial than taking the vow of a Nazirite.

Paul is hard to understand for this reason, he is dealing with aspects of God's Law on one hand, and the man made Laws added to God's Law on another. What makes this hard to differentiate from is in Greek, the only word for Law is Nomos. If it is speaking of God's Law it is nomos, if man's law, nomos.

Peace.
ken

kenrank
Dec 15th 2008, 03:54 PM
"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me..." Ga 2:20

"What shall we say then? Shall WE CONTINUE IN SIN that grace may abound? God forbid. HOW SHALL WE THAT ARE DEAD TO SIN LIVE ANY LONGER THEREIN?" Rom 6:1.

Jesus died to set us free from sin.

According to Matt 7:21-23, it is not what we SAY, but what we DO.

So, are you saying, that, we can bow down and worship other gods, take His name in vain, profane His holy day, dishonor our parents, murder, commit adultery, steal, bear false witness, covet and walk in His Spirit?

James 2:10,11 tells us, that, of we break any of His Commandments, we become transgressors of His law and are guilty of breaking all of them.

Again, we agree. It was sin, or in better words, the condemnation associated with it, death, that was abolished. We were guilty under the Law of God, but we have been pardoned of that guilt...but not pardoned from being obedient to God and His will. Being pardoned does not abrogate the law...we still can't serve other gods, lie, steal, kill oue neighbor and take his wife....these things are still sin and must not be done.

peace,
ken

herald
Dec 15th 2008, 04:05 PM
So, do you, still, sacrifice animals?

"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 the cross." Col 2:14

"Having abolished in His flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in Himself of twain one new man, so making peace." Eph 2:15

kenrank
Dec 15th 2008, 04:08 PM
I'm not sure that the Greek would be as bad with dikaios as it is with nomos. I am not a Greek scholar nor student, so I am too weak in this area to speak definitively. I do not believe that Greek speakers would be confused as to which meaning was carried in context. It's just that in English we are limited in our use of righteousness. We can not use that term as a verb, but in Greek and Hebrew, you can use dikaios or tzadik as a verb or adjective or noun.

With nomos, we are not talking about using a different English word based on the word usage (verb, noun, adjective) but we are confused as to which law is being spoken of.

As far as the NT being written in Hebrew: I have studied this too. Biven and Blizzard give compelling arguments. I have concluded that regardless of what language was the original copy, these things are true: 1) The disciples and Jesus spoke Hebrew as their primary language. 2) Paul was fluent in Hebrew and was likely his native tongue or at least on par with his native tongue. 3) regardless of the they wrote in, they would still need to translate from Hebrew to Greek either while they were writing, or soon afterwards.

We do have the received Text in Greek, however, and that's our base. While understanding Hebrew and how one might translate back into Hebrew can aide our study and expand it, it shouldn't ever change the meaning given in the received Text.

That all being said, my guess is that Matthew and Hebrews are the top picks for being written in Hebrew first, then translated.

MJH

I actually "lean" toward ALL of it but Luke and Mark (Acts too) having been in Hebrew. But regardless, Hebrew was the perspective they would have seen scripture through, so even if every NT word was penned in Greek, it would have been done so through a hebrew paradigm. Here, you might find these interesting...not to outwiegh any scripture, but interesting.


Eusebius quoted Origen’s list of Inspired books where Origen mentioned the following concerning the gospels.


“The first is written according to Matthew, the same that was once a publican, but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, who having published it for the Jewish converts, wrote it in the Hebrew.”


Eusebius also reported quotes from Irenaeus 120AD-202AD, the bishop of Lyons concerning the Gospels which can be found below.


"Matthew, indeed, “said he, “produced his gospel written among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul proclaimed the gospel and founded the church at Rome. (3) After the departure of these, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, also transmitted to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. And Luke, the companion of Paul, committed to writing the gospel preached by him, i.e., Paul....”


So Luke apparently (and maybe Clement) translated Paul's works (half the NT) and Mark translated Peter. Matthew wrote outright in Hebrew, and we have to assume then that John probably also wrote in Hebrew. I found the quote from Matthew interesting too...apparently, a writing that no longer exists...or is stuck in the catacombs of Rome??


Ignatius believed that Clement had translated the book of Hebrews.
Ignatius died in 110AD and Clement died in 101AD. Eusebius quotes Ignatius:


“It is probable that this was also numbered with the other writings of the apostles, for as Paul had addressed the Hebrews in the language of his country, some say that the evangelist Luke, others that Clement, translated the epistle. (3) This appears more like the truth, since the epistle of Clement and that to the Hebrews preserved the same features of style and phraseology, and the sentiments in both these works were not very different.”


Here is a link to my teacher's page. He has some good articles you might find interesting. These quotes come from the article, "Why emphasize Hebrew."


http://www.drybonesrestorationcompany.com/ (http://www.drybonesrestorationcompany.com/)


Peace to you and blessings!
Ken

herald
Dec 15th 2008, 04:13 PM
I would recommend the Hebrew/Greek Interlinear, so that, you can read it for yourself, as I do.

kenrank
Dec 15th 2008, 04:19 PM
Kenrank...there is a distinction in the law.

The Ceremonial law was fulfilled on the cross. The Ten Commandment Covenant is, still, in effect.

I disagree, the law is far more than 10 Words or commands. Messiah said he did not come to destroy the law but to fulfill. He said if earth (and heaven) are still here, (it is) so is the law. He said that anyone who does and teaches the law will be called great in the Kingdom of heaven, while those that don't do or teach against the law called the least.

Herald, you have to understand some of things Paul was addressing. There were many man made laws that were added to God's Law that Paul addressed. The wall of enmity put up by the Jews and between them and the Gentiles, abolished on the cross or stake. The condemnation of the law, the guilt....nailed to the cross or stake. But as you have rightly divided, no mention of the Law being nailed to the cross is mentioned. Is it ceremonial to keep Sabbath? Many say yes...yet it is a part of the 10 commands. Was taking the vow of a Nazirite a ceremonial law, if so, why did Paul accomplish these days of purification AFTER the ascension? Is keeping Passover ceremonial? If yes, why did Paul say to keep on keeping it in 1 Cor 5:7-8? Is tithing ceremonial? If so, why do so many dispensational churches use that law when passing the collection plate? I can go on, but I can see that you are both intelligent and a student of God's word. That should be enough to maybe reconsider your point.

Peace and blessings.
Ken

kenrank
Dec 15th 2008, 04:19 PM
I would recommend the Hebrew/Greek Interlinear, so that, you can read it for yourself, as I do.

I have one and I do...thank you!!

Peace.
Ken

keck553
Dec 15th 2008, 04:36 PM
Someone mentioned the feasts as being fulfilled. This is not true. Sukkot, Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashannah have not yet been fulfilled. Unless someone thinks Messiah's second coming has already occured.

herald
Dec 15th 2008, 07:41 PM
There is no command in the New Testament to keep the feast days. Yes, there is some future fulfillment.

Paul was being a Jew, to reach the Jews. "For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I MIGHT GAIN THE MORE. And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; To them that are without the law, as without law (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law. To the weak, became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I AM MADE ALL THINGS TO ALL MEN, THAT I MIGHT BY ALL MEANS SAVE SOME.

And this I do for the Gospel's sake, that I might be a partaker thereof with you." 1 Cor 9:

I agree with you...I embrace every Scripture in God's Word, including keeping the Sabbath, and the baptism in the Holy Spirit, with the evidence of speaking in tongues. By His Spirit being released through me, I have healed the sick, cast out demons, and in a group of three, raised a man from the dead, according to Mk 16:17,18.

Just as in the Catholic/Protestant religious system, much of the Word of God has been replaced by tradition.

So with the Jews, they added hundreds of rules and regulations, but these are not in the Scripture. They added hundreds of rules and regulations to the keeping of the Sabbath.

Jesus did not defer to their tradition, but, kept God's law, perfectly.

I hope, that, you are not saying, that God's Word is full of tradition.

In 2 Tim 3:16 in the Greek, it reads, "Every Scripture is God breathed..." It's, either His Word, or it isn't. Who are we to decide what is His Word?

kenrank
Dec 16th 2008, 05:14 AM
There is no command in the New Testament to keep the feast days. Yes, there is some future fulfillment.

Herald, have hyou considered this from Paul?

1Co 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
1Co 5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.


By His Spirit being released through me, I have healed the sick, cast out demons, and in a group of three, raised a man from the dead, according to Mk 16:17,18.

Herald, I understand your meaning I believe. BUT, I would choose your words a bit more carefully. Have YOU healed ANYONE, or has God through you healed? I don't believe we have the power to do anything...that God through his people does the work. Saying >>I<< have healed is giving YOU the glory. As for the raising of the dead...I would have liked to have been there.

Ken

drew
Dec 16th 2008, 02:59 PM
Paul specifically mentions the "Party of circumcision" - do you think he was referring to pagans when he wrote that descriptor?
I agree. Whatever else Galatians is about, it clearly contains a strong element of a critique of Judaism by Paul.

drew
Dec 16th 2008, 04:37 PM
The text you quote:

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;"

The word which in this translation is ordinances, is the word dogma in Greek. The Greek word "dogma" never refers to any commands given by God. They are always man made rules, usually not very good ones.

We can see the same Greek word in this same passage translated later....

Col 2:21-23 "If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations[DOGMA]-- "Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch" (referring to things that all perish as they are used)--according to human precepts and teachings? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh."

Clearly nothing in this section could be connected with God's Law.

Your main point may or may not have value, but the text you use does not support your conclusions. Col 2:14 can not be speaking of a so-called ceremonial law, nor any other part of God's law.
In Colossians 2:14, Paul is indeed declaring the abolition of the Torah. Here is the relevant chunk of text:

11and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; 12having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. 13When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions, 14having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. 15When He had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them, having triumphed over them through Him. 16Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day-- 17things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.

It is argued that in verse 14, Paul is talking about the abolition of “man-made” decrees, and not Torah in any sense. This same argument is made in respect to Ephesians 2:15. I suggest that it has been shown elsewhere that in Ephesians 2:15, Paul must be referring to the abolition of Torah, precisely because such a reading makes far better sense of the local context than does a reading where it is merely “man-made” add-ons to, or distortions of, Torah that are abolished.

I believe the same is true here in Colossians 2 – an analysis of both the local context, and Paul’s more general themes, will show that Torah is in view in verse 14.

Note that in verse 11, Paul emphasizes that the Colossians have already been circumcised (in a sense that Paul then goes onto explain). Paul is declaring that the circumcision of the heart is effective and that the circumcision done by men is not. The key point is that circumcision is the mark of the Jew and we therefore discern that Paul is engaged of a critique of a specifically Jewish belief that fleshly circumcision is a badge of membership in God’s covenant family. This helps resolve the ambiguity of the “decrees” of verse 14: What are these decrees? Are they Torah or something else? Paul’s focus on the insufficiency of circumcision, a specifically Jewish marker, strongly suggests, that in verse 14, Paul is declaring the abolition of another Jewish marker – the prescriptions of the Torah. Abolition of Torah would be an entirely expected “next move” for Paul, after having critiqued the effectiveness of circumcision.

Note how the alternative position on offer – that verse 14 is concerned with abolition of add-ons to Torah – renders Paul’s argument rather disjointed. On such a reading, in verse 11 we have Paul critiquing the value of a practice that specifically marks out the Jew, while in verse 14, his critique of distortions and add-ons leaves Torah itself entirely intact, even though Torah marks out the Jew just like circumcision. If anything marked out the Jew, it was things like Sabbath, festivals, purity laws, etc., all part of Torah. The reader will legitimately see Paul as making an incoherent argument. Of course, coherence is resolved if we understand that the “decrees” of verse 14 are the decrees of Torah. On such a reading, Paul is making a single integrated argument about how God has done away with the “Jew-Gentile” boundary. And, of course, Paul makes similar arguments elsewhere (e.g. Ephesians 2).

I will re-iterate my view that the proper way to decide between alternative readings of Paul is to determine which option results in a focused and coherent argument. Paul was a highly educated Pharisee - he is not inclined to wander.

In this context, note how closely Paul links circumcision and Torah, discerning them both as markers of the Jew:

And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law.

In later posts, I plan to argue that Paul's broader themes - ideas that run through the entire corpus of his writings - lead us to see that it is indeed the decrees of Torah that he abolishes in Colossians 2.

drew
Dec 16th 2008, 05:35 PM
If the "law" was nailed to the cross, done away with...that Messiah lied when he said earth would pass away before the Law would. (earth is still here)
I know that we have addressed this in another thread. However, for the sake of the people in this thread, I offer a different view on what Jesus might have meant by "heaven and earth passing away".

in Hebrew culture apocalyptic “end of the world” language was commonly used in a specifically metaphorical mode for the specific purposes of investing commonplace events with their theological significance.

This is not mere speculation – we have concrete evidence that this was so. Isaiah writes:

10For the stars of heaven and their constellations
Will not flash forth their light;
The sun will be dark when it rises
And the moon will not shed its light

What was going on? Babylon was being destroyed, never to be rebuilt. If we were to assume that this prophecy has not been fulfilled because the stars and the moon have not gone dark, we would be clearly in error. I will not argue the point here, but I suggest the overwhelming weight of evidence makes it clear - this prophecy is about the fall of Babylon. And it has already been fulfilled. So we need to be careful in interpreting what Jesus says - He was embedded in a certain culture and he was heir to a tradition where such apocalyptic language was used all the time in a highly metaphorical sense.

There are other examples of such metaphorical “end of the world” imagery being used to describe much more “mundane” events within the present space-time manifold.

So it is possible that Jesus is not referring to the destruction of matter, space, and time as the criteria for the retirement of the Law.
But what might He mean here? What is the real event for which “heaven and earth passing away” is an apocalyptic metaphor.

I would appeal to the phrase “until all is accomplished” and point the reader to Jesus’ proclamation that “It is accomplished!” as He breathed His last on the Cross. Perhaps this is what Jesus is referring to. I believe that seeing it that way allows us to take Paul at his word in his many statements which clearly denote the work of Jesus as the point in time at which Torah was retired.

kenrank
Dec 16th 2008, 05:56 PM
I know that we have addressed this in another thread. However, for the sake of the people in this thread, I offer a different view on what Jesus might have meant by "heaven and earth passing away".

in Hebrew culture apocalyptic “end of the world” language was commonly used in a specifically metaphorical mode for the specific purposes of investing commonplace events with their theological significance.

This is not mere speculation – we have concrete evidence that this was so. Isaiah writes:

10For the stars of heaven and their constellations
Will not flash forth their light;
The sun will be dark when it rises
And the moon will not shed its light

What was going on? Babylon was being destroyed, never to be rebuilt. If we were to assume that this prophecy has not been fulfilled because the stars and the moon have not gone dark, we would be clearly in error. I will not argue the point here, but I suggest the overwhelming weight of evidence makes it clear - this prophecy is about the fall of Babylon. And it has already been fulfilled. So we need to be careful in interpreting what Jesus says - He was embedded in a certain culture and he was heir to a tradition where such apocalyptic language was used all the time in a highly metaphorical sense.

There are other examples of such metaphorical “end of the world” imagery being used to describe much more “mundane” events within the present space-time manifold.

So it is possible that Jesus is not referring to the destruction of matter, space, and time as the criteria for the retirement of the Law.
But what might He mean here? What is the real event for which “heaven and earth passing away” is an apocalyptic metaphor.

I would appeal to the phrase “until all is accomplished” and point the reader to Jesus’ proclamation that “It is accomplished!” as He breathed His last on the Cross. Perhaps this is what Jesus is referring to. I believe that seeing it that way allows us to take Paul at his word in his many statements which clearly denote the work of Jesus as the point in time at which Torah was retired.

And I too would like to offer an alternative. We know the elements will melt with fervent heat. That the earth, and the heavens, will be destroyed and a NEW heaven and a NEW earth will be created. From the NEW heavens, a NEW Yerushalem will come down.

When Messiah said that heaven and earth will pass away before one jot or tittle of law would, I personally believe he is speaking about the time when heaven and earth are destroyed and replaced with a new heaven and earth. If the case, this has not happened yet...which would mean that the law has also not "passed away."

The context in all those Matt. 5 verses come together to create a picture that obediance to God....once you come in faith....is something he asks of us. Aside from Messiah's above comment, he also said that if you do and teach the law, you will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. And that if you don't do and teach against the law, you will be called the least in the kingdom of heaven.

So while I appreciate your other perspective Drew, I don't personally see it that way. Besides, physical Babylon was destroyed BEFORE Messiah said these things. Messiah's words concerning the law are future tense..."until" used once and "shall" twice in 5:18, "shall" used 5 times in 5:19...future tense. When he said he did not come to destroy the law but fulfill...that would be impossible if Babylon fits into your picture.

Peace.
Ken

drew
Dec 16th 2008, 06:30 PM
This is a follow-on to my previous post about how Colossians 2:14 declares the abolition of Torah. The material in the present post is based on Paul’s use of the phrase “body of flesh” in verse 11. This argument will appeal to broader Pauline themes.

and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ;

Paul’s use of this concept of a body “of the flesh” or “a body of sin / death” appears in Romans 6:6 and Romans 7:24. In Romans 6, we have:

knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin; 7for he who has died is freed from sin. 8Now (P (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ROmans%206;&version=49;#cen-NASB-28077Pcen-NASB-28077P))if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, 9knowing that Christ, having been (Q (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ROmans%206;&version=49;#cen-NASB-28078Qcen-NASB-28078Q))raised from the dead, is never to die again; (R (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ROmans%206;&version=49;#cen-NASB-28078Rcen-NASB-28078R))death no longer is master over Him. 10For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. 11Even so consider yourselves to be (S (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ROmans%206;&version=49;#cen-NASB-28080Scen-NASB-28080S))dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus. 12Therefore do not let sin (T (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ROmans%206;&version=49;#cen-NASB-28081Tcen-NASB-28081T))reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts, 13and do not go on (U (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ROmans%206;&version=49;#cen-NASB-28082Ucen-NASB-28082U))presenting the members of your body to sin as instruments of unrighteousness; but (V (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ROmans%206;&version=49;#cen-NASB-28082Vcen-NASB-28082V))present yourselves to God as those alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14For (W (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ROmans%206;&version=49;#cen-NASB-28083Wcen-NASB-28083W))sin shall not (X (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ROmans%206;&version=49;#cen-NASB-28083Xcen-NASB-28083X))be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

Paul’s argument is that being under Torah is a place where sin has its way with you – the rhetorical structure of verse 14 suggest that if the reader were under law, s/he would indeed be subject to the mastery of sin. (Note that Paul is consistent in his use of “nomos” throughout Romans to denote the Torah). Romans 7 expands this argument, claiming that sin is strangely energized and strengthened by Torah (this has been extensively argued elsewhere). Thus, we get this summary statement from Paul using the “body of sin / death” motif:

Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?

As has been demonstrated elsewhere, Paul is talking about the plight of the Jew under Torah in Romans 7 – sin is empowered by Torah and produces death for the Jew. This coheres perfectly with the above block of text from chapter 6 where Paul very strongly implies that being under Torah (“law”) is a state where sin has mastery from which the Jew needs to be delivered (set free).

The “body of flesh” language of Colossians 2:11 connects the Colossians argument to Romans 6 and 7, and thereby to Torah. Being under Torah leads to death (Romans 7 (clearly) and Romans 6 (by strong implication)). Colossians 2:11 uses the same “body of flesh / sin / death” language as is used in Romans 6 and 7 to make a point about delivery from the “death that is circumcision”. And since we know that, for Paul, circumcision goes hand in hand with Torah (Galatians 5), we should not be surprised to read in Colossian 2:14 that Torah, too, has been “removed” just like circumcision is removed in verse 11, since Torah binds the Jew to a body of death from which the Jew needs deliverance.

Paul’s point in Colossians 2:14 is a natural extension of this same argument that Torah leads to death . Note how Paul characterizes the “decrees” as being “hostile to us”. This is precisely the point Paul makes about Torah in Romans 6 and especially 7 – Torah energizes sin and gives it the power to kill the Jew. If Paul means something other than “Torah” by his reference to “decrees”, then the coherence of what would otherwise be a sophisticated argument about Torah, spanning multiple Pauline letters, is lost. This is hardly likely, in my view.

drew
Dec 16th 2008, 06:43 PM
And I too would like to offer an alternative. We know the elements will melt with fervent heat. That the earth, and the heavens, will be destroyed and a NEW heaven and a NEW earth will be created. From the NEW heavens, a NEW Yerushalem will come down.

When Messiah said that heaven and earth will pass away before one jot or tittle of law would, I personally believe he is speaking about the time when heaven and earth are destroyed and replaced with a new heaven and earth. If the case, this has not happened yet...which would mean that the law has also not "passed away."

I do not think that Paul holds the position that you ascribe to him. Even though there are texts (such as the one you refer) that describe the heavens the earth as being "destroyed", I suggest that they must be metaphorical, due to powerful evidence that God will instead rescue and redeem his created order. From Romans 8:

19The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed. 20For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21that[i (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208;&version=31;#fen-NIV-28123i)] the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God

Let's be clear - either creation will be destroyed and be replaced (your Pauline text seems to support this) or it will be redeemed (Romans 8 supports this). So, as is often the case, things are not a simple as they seem. Paul cannot intend that both the Romans text and the Peter ? text to be taken literally - he is too smart to contradict himself.

I suggest that this text from Colossians 1 support the "redemption" model in respect to the fate of creation:

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 17He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross

If Christ has redeemed everything, how sensible would it be to think that God is going to burn it all away to ashes and replace it?

Same with this text from Ephesians 1:

9And he[d (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=56&chapter=1&version=31#fen-NIV-29200d)] made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, 10to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment—to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ.

Again, would Paul argue that all things in heaven and on earth have been brought together, only to be later melted away?

There are plenty of other arguments that can be made in support of the idea that God will redeem and transform creation, not destroy and replace it.

drew
Dec 16th 2008, 06:50 PM
Besides, physical Babylon was destroyed BEFORE Messiah said these things. Messiah's words concerning the law are future tense..."until" used once and "shall" twice in 5:18, "shall" used 5 times in 5:19...future tense. When he said he did not come to destroy the law but fulfill...that would be impossible if Babylon fits into your picture.
This is not a valid critique of my argument. My argument was that we have scriptural precedent for "end of the world" language being used to describe "normal events" that precede the literal "end of the world". Thus, the prophet predicts the destruction of Babylon as entailing cataclysmic collapse of the space-time universe. Yet we know that Babylon has already fallen and the universe is still here.

So, of course, we draw that natural conclusion that the prophet was speaking metaphorically.

So just as Isaiah's prediction came true before the end of the space-time universe, so we can legitimately entertain the possibility that the abolition of Torah also will come true, or has already come true, before the end of the space-time universe (actualy, as per my last post, I do not think we are intended to understand that creation will ever be destroyed).

kenrank
Dec 16th 2008, 09:02 PM
This is not a valid critique of my argument. My argument was that we have scriptural precedent for "end of the world" language being used to describe "normal events" that precede the literal "end of the world". Thus, the prophet predicts the destruction of Babylon as entailing cataclysmic collapse of the space-time universe. Yet we know that Babylon has already fallen and the universe is still here.

So, of course, we draw that natural conclusion that the prophet was speaking metaphorically.

So just as Isaiah's prediction came true before the end of the space-time universe, so we can legitimately entertain the possibility that the abolition of Torah also will come true, or has already come true, before the end of the space-time universe (actualy, as per my last post, I do not think we are intended to understand that creation will ever be destroyed).

To your last point first, I agree. There will be a new heaven and earth...but creation stems from an eternal creator...so in that sense creation itself cannot end.

As for the rest, we disagree, what can I say? use of future tense words by Messiah lead us to a future event. He didn't speak in prophetic tones...he prophecied, but he was specific. Parables spoken...but nothing he did looked backward. So while I understand where you are coming from, and will give it some further consideration, I don't agree. I think he is pointing to the time when earth as we know it literally passes away, and until then, the law continues. Look Drew...Isaiah 66:22-23 says that from Sabbath to Sabbath and New Moon to New Moon all flesh shall come to worship YHWH. That was verse 23, 22 speaks of this time being when he has created the new heaven and new earth...so the Sabbath and New Moon observances will be in effect then. Lastly, if the law is written in your heart as part of the new covenant...how is it gone?

Just some questions...not trying to be contentious!
Ken

drew
Dec 16th 2008, 09:31 PM
use of future tense words by Messiah lead us to a future event. He didn't speak in prophetic tones...he prophecied, but he was specific.
I do not understand your point. Of course, Jesus was speaking about a future event when He spoke of Torah in Matthew 5. And, by the same token, Isaiah was also speaking about a future event when he wrote these words;

10For the stars of heaven and their constellations
Will not flash forth their light;
The sun will be dark when it rises
And the moon will not shed its light

The event he was predicting was the fall of Babylon. And that has happened - it is in the past for you and me, but it was in the future for Isaiah.

The point is that a literal reading of Isaiah's prophecy would obviously be mistaken. We know, for a variety of reasons, that he was talking about the fall of Babylon. So we have a clear Biblical precedent - "end of the world" language is used to refer to points in time that actually precede the "end of the world".

This means that we cannot simply assume that when Jesus said the Torah will last until "heaven and earth pass away", He may well have been speaking using the same style as Isaiah. I am not saying that He must have been speaking that way - but there are lots of reaons to conclude that, in fact, Jesus was not referring to the "end of the world" here but rather was referring to a different point in time. I will not elaborate here, but will probably do so in a future post.


Isaiah 66:22-23 says that from Sabbath to Sabbath and New Moon to New Moon all flesh shall come to worship YHWH. That was verse 23, 22 speaks of this time being when he has created the new heaven and new earth...so the Sabbath and New Moon observances will be in effect then. Lastly, if the law is written in your heart as part of the new covenant...how is it gone?
Here is the text

22For just as the (BD (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2066;&version=49;#cen-NASB-18945BD))new heavens and the new earth
Which I make will endure before Me," declares the LORD,
"So your (BE (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2066;&version=49;#cen-NASB-18945BE))offspring and your (BF (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2066;&version=49;#cen-NASB-18945BF))name will endure.
23"And it shall be from (BG (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2066;&version=49;#cen-NASB-18946BG))new moon to new moon
And from sabbath to sabbath,
All mankind will come to (BH (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2066;&version=49;#cen-NASB-18946BH))bow down before Me," says the Lord

I will now introduce a concept that I believe I have not introduced in these discussions. I assert that Paul believes that the resurrection of Jesus constitutes the first-fruit of the new heavens and the new earth. In other words, I am claiming that, in very real albeit subtle sense, Paul believes that the "new heavens and new earth" are here already.

If that is true, and I am not going to defend this claim in this post, then this Isaiah material does not create a problem for the view that Torah has been retired.

I hope to explain more about all this later.

With reference to the matter of the law being written on the heart, Paul is quite clear in Romans 10 that the "law" has been written on the heart of the believer

As per another post of mine, here is the argument:

But the righteousness that is by faith says: "Do not say in your heart, 'Who will ascend into heaven?'" (that is, to bring Christ down) 7"or 'Who will descend into the deep?'[c (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2010&version=31#fen-NIV-28181c)]" (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). 8But what does it say? "The word is near you; it is in your mouth [B]and in your heart,"[d (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2010&version=31#fen-NIV-28182d)] that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming:9That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved

Paul here is quoting a well-known covenant renewal passage from Deuteronomy 30:

11 Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. 12 It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, "Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?" 13 Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, "Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?" 14 No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it

Paul has clearly concluded that this prophecy about the "word being in the heart" has come true.

Christian faith - believing that Jesus is risen and is Lord - is the real covenantal doing of Torah that is written on the human heart. We need not wait - we have already received this gift.

kenrank
Dec 16th 2008, 09:55 PM
Brother Drew. If Messiah says that heaven and earth will pass away before the law....but the passing of said event happened before Messiah even came to be on this earth, what is his point?

"I have not come to destroy the law but to fulfill, for verily I say to you that heaven and earth shall pass away before one jot or tittle of the law will pass until all is fulfilled."

Since we know from other scripture that all has not been fulfilled...we await his return, the things God spoke through his prophets of old will be restored (Acts 3:19-21)...we havn't been made incorruptable, etc......these things are yet to be fulfilled. All has not been fulfilled.

As I stated in my last post Drew, in 2 verses the future tense "shall" is used. If Babylon is a past event, and it is, using future tense words is...confusing. We simply have to reason through this.

Peace.
Ken

drew
Dec 16th 2008, 10:27 PM
As I stated in my last post Drew, in 2 verses the future tense "shall" is used. If Babylon is a past event, and it is, using future tense words is...confusing. We simply have to reason through this.

The point is this:

1. At some point, Isaiah sat down and prophecied about a future event - the fall of Babylon was in the future from Isaiah's perspective.

2. There is no difference in the "prediction" nature of what Isaiah said and what Jesus said. Both use future tense language.

3. Isaiah's actual language, if taken literally, would lead one to conclude that until "the stars fall", the prophecy cannot have been fulfilled.

4. But we know that the prohpecy has been fulfilled - Babylon has fallen.

5. Therefore we know that writers of Scripture can use metaphorical language that is not to be taken literally.

6. Therefore, it is entirely plausible that Jesus was using such metaphorical language and that the retirement of Torah would happen at some event prior to "heaven and earth passing away", just like Babylon fell before any event where the stars fell and the moon stopped shedding its light.

I hope it is clear that there are no "tense" problems here - Jesus makes a prediction about the future. So does Isaiah. Both prophecies are structurally alike in this respect.

kenrank
Dec 16th 2008, 10:50 PM
The point is this:

1. At some point, Isaiah sat down and prophecied about a future event - the fall of Babylon was in the future from Isaiah's perspective.

2. There is no difference in the "prediction" nature of what Isaiah said and what Jesus said. Both use future tense language.

3. Isaiah's actual language, if taken literally, would lead one to conclude that until "the stars fall", the prophecy cannot have been fulfilled.

4. But we know that the prohpecy has been fulfilled - Babylon has fallen.

5. Therefore we know that writers of Scripture can use metaphorical language that is not to be taken literally.

6. Therefore, it is entirely plausible that Jesus was using such metaphorical language and that the retirement of Torah would happen at some event prior to "heaven and earth passing away", just like Babylon fell before any event where the stars fell and the moon stopped shedding its light.

I hope it is clear that there are no "tense" problems here - Jesus makes a prediction about the future. So does Isaiah. Both prophecies are structurally alike in this respect.

I understood Drew. What I was saying is that Isaiah used future tense..but was speaking of the future. Messiah used future tense but was speaking of the past? To me, that doesn't make sense.

The other issue is whether or not physical Babylon falling was what Messiah was refering to. We know there will be a time when heaven and earth will pass away and be replaced with a new heaven and earth. Why do you reject that as what he might have been refering to?

Peace.
Ken

drew
Dec 16th 2008, 10:56 PM
Brother Drew. If Messiah says that heaven and earth will pass away before the law....but the passing of said event happened before Messiah even came to be on this earth, what is his point?
Who said that the event which signalled the end of Torah happened before Messiah came? Certainly not me.


"I have not come to destroy the law but to fulfill, for verily I say to you that heaven and earth shall pass away before one jot or tittle of the law will pass until all is fulfilled."

Since we know from other scripture that all has not been fulfilled...we await his return, the things God spoke through his prophets of old will be restored (Acts 3:19-21)...we havn't been made incorruptable, etc......these things are yet to be fulfilled. All has not been fulfilled.
I think a plausible case can be made that Jesus was engaging in a form of metaphoric exageration when he used the term "all". Lest anyone think I am inventing such metaphorical devices to salvage my position, it is a precedent set by the likes of Isaiah. Note what he prophecies about the fall of Edom:

And (I (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2034;&version=49;#cen-NASB-18308I))all the host of heaven will wear away,
And the (J (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2034;&version=49;#cen-NASB-18308J))sky will be rolled up like a scroll;
All their hosts will also wither away
As a leaf withers from the vine,
Or as one withers from the fig tree.
5For (K (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2034;&version=49;#cen-NASB-18309K))My sword is satiated in heaven,
Behold it shall descend for judgment upon (L (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2034;&version=49;#cen-NASB-18309L))Edom
And upon the people whom I have (M (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2034;&version=49;#cen-NASB-18309M))devoted to destruction

This sounds like "end of the world" language, but we know that Edom has already fallen (although that event lay in Isaiah's future).

There are other examples - Jesus was heir to a tradition where such metaphorical exaggeration was used. End of the world apocalyptic language was used to invest more "mundane" events with their theological significance.

There are a host of complex and inter-related arguments as to why we should see the Matthew 5:18 prophecy of Jesus as having been fulfilled 2000 years ago. I have not written much on this, but I believe that there are powerful and compelling arguments to the effect that when Jesus refers to "heaven and earth passing away", He is actually referring to the end of Israel as she was constituted at the time. Again, the re-constitution of Israel was a central theme of Jesus' teaching (I suggest).

I plan to address all this in more detail. I think that those who think that Torah is still in force have their own challenges to face (e.g. Eph 2, Galatians, and Colossians 2). I politely submit that the explanations so far on offer for how these texts allows to see Torah as still in force simply do not work exegetically. But we can re-visit those if we like.

drew
Dec 16th 2008, 11:12 PM
I understood Drew. What I was saying is that Isaiah used future tense..but was speaking of the future. Messiah used future tense but was speaking of the past? To me, that doesn't make sense.
I never said anything about Jesus referring to the past. I think that Torah was retired on the cross - that is an event in Jesus' future.


The other issue is whether or not physical Babylon falling was what Messiah was refering to.
OK, now I think I see what is going on but it is still a mystery to me. I never said anything about Jesus' prophecy being a prophecy about Babylon. That was Isaiah's prophecy. I am not sure why you think that I think that Jesus is talking about Babylon in Matthew 5 - He most certainly is not. He is talking about the conditions for the retirement of the Torah.


We know there will be a time when heaven and earth will pass away and be replaced with a new heaven and earth. Why do you reject that as what he might have been refering to?
For a wide range of reasons such as:

1. Precedent - we know that such end of the world language was commonly used to denote for "non end of the world" events;

2. Paul's direct statements: I think that the case that Paul asserted the retirement of Torah are numerous and clear. Counter-arguments are demonstrably weak exegetically

3. Paul's broad sweeping argument that Torah was intended to lure sin into the flesh of Jesus in order to be condemned. That has happened, so the Torah has done its job;

4. Paul's arguments about "there being neither Jew nor Greek in Christ. If the Jew is still under Torah, there are still sharp distinctions.

5. Jesus teaching that judgement was forthcoming on Israel - she would soon be effectively destroyed, with God using Rome as the vehicle for that judgement. I suggest that when Jesus overthrew the tables in the temple, He was symbollically announcing the coming destruction of the temple, and with it the end of Torah.

6. I know that this will offend some, but I believe that, in places like Matthew 12, Jesus intentionally broke the prescriptions of Torah - in order to announce its imminent retirement. Same thing with Jesus breaking Torah by contact with corpses, lepers, and the menstruating women. I understand these to all constitute violations of Torah. I suspect that we will disagree on this, and I concede that I have really only investigated the Matthew 12 incident in any detail. Please feel free to make any case that these other events did not constitute a violation of Torah.

As you can see, rightly or wrongly, I see a lot of reasons to understand that Torah, as a system of rules and regulations, has been retired (with honour).

drew
Dec 16th 2008, 11:18 PM
Although I definitely have a different view about the status of Torah as most here, I think it is strangely ironic that I suspect we stand together as seeing Jesus not as a timeless figure whose Jewish context is "incidental" to his message, but rather as a figure deeply embedded in the Jewish world, making a lot of arguments that are specifically for the Jews.

Same with Paul - I see him as being squarely embedded in a Jewish worldview, and bending over backwards to integrate the story of Jesus with the story of Israel.

And although I think that Torah is "retired", I think God used it as a central means to bring salvation to the world. And I think that all believers everywhere owe the Jews a great dept of gratitude - they acted out the Christ pattern, by being "cast away for the sake of the world". Romans 11 is all about this.

kenrank
Dec 17th 2008, 05:58 PM
Who said that the event which signalled the end of Torah happened before Messiah came? Certainly not me.

It sounded like you were saying that Yahushua in Matt 5 was refering back to the fall of Babylon when saying what he did about heaven and earth passing away.

Peace,
Ken

kenrank
Dec 17th 2008, 06:06 PM
I never said anything about Jesus referring to the past. I think that Torah was retired on the cross - that is an event in Jesus' future.

But even as we speak Drew, not all has been fulfilled.


OK, now I think I see what is going on but it is still a mystery to me. I never said anything about Jesus' prophecy being a prophecy about Babylon. That was Isaiah's prophecy. I am not sure why you think that I think that Jesus is talking about Babylon in Matthew 5 - He most certainly is not. He is talking about the conditions for the retirement of the Torah.

Will go back and see if I can find that post. Doesn't matter...you have made yourself clear...no problems!


I know that this will offend some, but I believe that, in places like Matthew 12, Jesus intentionally broke the prescriptions of Torah - in order to announce its imminent retirement. Same thing with Jesus breaking Torah by contact with corpses, lepers, and the menstruating women.

First, if he broke Torah which you admit wasn't done away with until the cross, he sinned. If he sinned we are still under the curse of death! Second, when is "contact with a corpse" breaking Torah? Touching a corpse made you unclean, it was not a sin. Likewise, Yahushua is not of the tribe of Levi, the Levitical priests having commands applicable to them alone. Messiah came from the tribe of Judah.

Peace.
Ken

kenrank
Dec 17th 2008, 06:10 PM
Drew...I just went back and checked, I has misread your point about Babylon.

My apologies!
Ken

drew
Dec 17th 2008, 06:31 PM
Drew...I just went back and checked, I has misread your point about Babylon.

My apologies!
Ken
No problem. And let me add that you have conducted yourself with impeccable politeness in all these interactions.

kenrank
Dec 17th 2008, 06:47 PM
No problem. And let me add that you have conducted yourself with impeccable politeness in all these interactions.

OH YEAH....WELL.....thank you! ;)

No reason we can't disagree and still act in a manner God would expect.

Peace.
Ken

MJH
Dec 19th 2008, 02:16 AM
In Colossians 2:14, Paul is indeed declaring the abolition of the Torah.

Drew,

I value your very well thought out argument concerning this text. I also appreciate the time and the thought you put into a well written response.

I have struggled in the past with discussing things in depth on a forum like this since often I put in a lot of time and effort only to have a response that is short and doesn't address anything I mentioned.

It is for this reason that I do not want to respond to your post with a short critique. Shortly I will be going on vacation and have some time to discuss this with you if you would like.

I envy the chance to have the discussion with someone who does not agree with me, but also has some ability to state why.

Until then, God bless.

MJH

PS - I have also copied and pasted a post you wrote to me earlier and was planning on using it on a blog post. I don't usually get people who believe the way I used to AND are able to make a good argument.:pp

drew
Dec 19th 2008, 07:01 PM
Hello MJH:

Thank you for your kind and generous words. I will check in periodically to see what is going on in this thread. It has been enjoyable to discuss these matters in the atmosphere of politeness and respect that has, in the main, characterised this (and the other) thread.

kenrank
Dec 20th 2008, 08:37 AM
Hello MJH:

Thank you for your kind and generous words. I will check in periodically to see what is going on in this thread. It has been enjoyable to discuss these matters in the atmosphere of politeness and respect that has, in the main, characterised this (and the other) thread.

I just wanted to add how well this discussion has gone. We don't have to believe everything exactly the same to be brothers in Messiah. But, we should be willing to reason the scripture out, rightly divide the Word...and that has been done here in respect. It has been a pleasure!

Blessings.
Ken