The False Gospel of Grace...

[Soyeong]

Before I tackle responding to this I need you to clarify for me what your theological background and religious affiliation is. I find what you say most unclear as to what it is really saying, and we need to get on level ground so we do not talk past one another.

I grew up Baptist and was one for roughly 30 years and became a Messianic roughly 11 years ago. I have no formal theological training, though it has been an interpret to discuss the Bible on various forums during a majority of that time.

The Psalms express an extremely positive view of God's law, such as with David repeatedly saying that he loved it and delighted in obeying it yet I had been taught to have an extremely negative view of God's law, so one day I realized that if I was going to continue to view the Psalms as being Scripture, then I needed to change my view to match the view that they express, especially considering that Paul also delighted in obeying it (Romans 7:22). For example, in Psalms 1:1-2, blessed are those who delight in the Law of the Lord who meditate on it day and night, so we can't continue to believe in the truth of these words as Scripture while not allowing them to shape our view of God's law. Furthermore, the authors of the NT considered the Psalms to be Scripture, so they should be interpreted as though they were in complete agreement with the view of God's law expressed in the Psalms. So I experimented with reading the NT from that view as if truly Paul meant what he said the he said that he delighted in obeying it and found that it made much more sense, it had much more continuity with the OT than I had given it credit for, and my eyes became open to my own biases and how I had been taught to systematically interpret the NT with a negative slant towards God's law. I've also grown to appreciate the depth that studying the Jewish cultural and historical context of the NT adds to it.

I apologize for being unclear and would be happy to clarify something if you want.

 

[Mr GLee]

I agree that "the letter of the law" leads to death and should be avoided like the plague, but what exactly was Paul referring to by that phrase?

2 Corinthians 3:6 who has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

The New Covenant involves God putting His law in our minds and writing it on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33) and God taking away our hearts of stone, giving us hearts of flesh, and sending His Spirit to lead us to obey His law (Ezekiel 36:26-27) and there are an abundance of verses that say that obedience to God's law is the way to eternal life, so what Paul was referring to by "the letter of the law" should be understood in a way that is in accordance with these other verses and not in a way that contradicts them.

Again, if "the letter of the law" refers to correctly obeying what God has commanded and doing that leads to death, then that would mean that God is leading us to death and should not be trusted. All throughout the Bible, God wanted His people to repent and to return to obedience to His law and even Jesus began his ministry with that Gospel message, so it seems to me that someone should be quicker to think that they must have misunderstood 2 Corinthians 3:6 than to think that is makes perfect sense to interpret a servant of God as warning us against obeying Him and saying that following God leads to death rather than life.

In Romans 7:22-23, Paul said that he delighted in obeying the Law of God, but contrasted that with the law of sin, which held him captive? Does it make sense to you to think that Paul delighted in stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death (Romans 7:5) or that he delighted in being held captive (Romans 7:6)? Rather, it is the law of sin that he described as holding him captive. The Spirit is God, so does it make sense to you to think that following the leading of the Spirit is in opposition to following what God has commanded or to think that God would command something that was in opposition to following His Spirit?

In Romans 7:12-13, Paul said that the Law of God is good and that it was not that which is good that brought death to him.

Hi thanks. . . dying leads towards death . . . never to rise to another spirit life the letter as the instrument of death. The one appointment all make. . . dead never to rise body return to dust.

The same letter that kills gives life through the law of faith .(2 laws working as one new perfect) . ."Let there be" and "it was God alone good" the one Faithful and True Creator

Its the same letter (scripture) called the book of prophecy by which he sends out Christians two by two speaking a new tongue the tongue of Gods liberty . The apostles can plant (preach )the incorruptible born again seed and another water it with the water of the word the doctrines of God inspired from above. But God alone causes growth if any.

The apostles. . dying mankind are considered as nothing powerless every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour. (1 Corinthians 3:8)

Romans 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

You could say one draws giving us a earnest desire that desire lead to all new desires jesu in effect said not as I will but you Father the one with power to create new creatures as sons of God

Delivered. . empowered to do the will of the Father yoked with Christ. we can pray and beleive daily give us the strength to do it to his glory

 

[Arial]

I grew up Baptist and was one for roughly 30 years and became a Messianic roughly 11 years ago.

What do you mean by you became a Messianic? I know the meaning of the word. Do your mean Messianic Judaism? If so, what precise beliefs do you keep from Judaism?

The Psalms express an extremely positive view of God's law, such as with David repeatedly saying that he loved it and delighted in obeying it yet I had been taught to have an extremely negative view of God's law, so one day I realized that if I was going to continue to view the Psalms as being Scripture, then I needed to change my view to match the view that they express, especially considering that Paul also delighted in obeying it (Romans 7:22). For example, in Psalms 1:1-2, blessed are those who delight in the Law of the Lord who meditate on it day and night, so we can't continue to believe in the truth of these words as Scripture while not allowing them to shape our view of God's law. Furthermore, the authors of the NT considered the Psalms to be Scripture, so they should be interpreted as though they were in complete agreement with the view of God's law expressed in the Psalms. So I experimented with reading the NT from that view as if truly Paul meant what he said the he said that he delighted in obeying it and found that it made much more sense, it had much more continuity with the OT than I had given it credit for, and my eyes became open to my own biases and how I had been taught to systematically interpret the NT with a negative slant towards God's law. I've also grown to appreciate the depth that studying the Jewish cultural and historical context of the NT adds to it.

I did explain how the two relate and why those under the law and who were being trained by the Mosaic Law would wrote about it in the way that they do, and refer to it. All those Psalms are applicable to those in the new covenant by extension, though many also were applied to specific historical events the psalmists were relating to. I read through the Psalms and when I reach the end, turn around and start at the beginning again. But where they refer to the Mosaic Law (which is what they learned about God through, plus all the book of the Law and Prophets,) for those in the new covenant not under that Law, when it says Law, for us, it means all He says and all He does. Of course we delight in it. I find in them how well they truly knew God, and how very much of who God is and our covenant relationship with Him. For bottom line, they all deal with a covenant relationship and how God views and treats and cares for His covenant children. I learn about God in them.

However you found the connection between old and new testament is wonderful. We are all different. I see not disconnect and the connection has only strengthened as I have grown by being in His word. The Bible is one book, containing many books but it is all, from beginning to end the same story unfolding. See my thread Scripture Interprets Scripture. If you were taught to interpret the NT with a negative slant towards the Law, that is a fault with your teachers. I personally have never encountered that. And the baby does not need to be thrown out with the bath water.

 

[Arial]

I apologize for being unclear and would be happy to clarify something if you want.

It just seems that you are saying two opposing things. You agree with salvation by grace through faith apart from works, and at the same time say it is necessary to keep the Law. Which I take to mean the Mosaic covenant law, but then you appear to not mean that either. I think the confusion comes from your insistence that salvation by grace apart from God's law is a license to sin. And here I think you do mean the Mosaic Law, but not keeping it, just loving it. Rather than hating it. I don't know any Christians who do hate it. And no true believer would ever not want to obey God's law concerning what is sinful. We are not always able to do it-----and I see the legal moral aspects of the Mosaic law given as imperatives, not law, on how a child of God is to order his thinking and how we should conduct ourselves with one another and in the world as His image bearers in the NT---but we are convicted of sin when we sin. A work of the Holy Spirit who is perfecting our faith. Slowly sin is put to death in us as well as in the present, having no power to condemn us.

So anyway, it often sounds like you are presenting salvation by works. By law keeping.

 

[Red Baker]

There are many verses that make it abundantly clear that eternal life requires us to choose to be a doer of the law,

Eternal life under the New Covenant has no requirement~it is a covenant based on two immutable acts of God~his oath and promises, the very same two immutable acts toward Abraham concerning his son Isaac, who was a perfect type of all children of God's promises.

Galatians 4:28~"Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise."

You are laboring to corrupt this covenant by inserting man's obedience which was the requirement of first covenant made with Adam and his posterity that came from his loins. We all know what that got us~death, both physical and spiritual~and the second death in the lake of fire, if mercy is not shown by God.

I agree that the we are not required to have obeyed it first in order to result in earning it as a wage. For example, in Matthew 19:17, Jesus said that the way to enter eternal life is by obeying God's commandments. In Luke 10:25-28, Jesus said that obedience to the greatest to commandments is the way to inherit eternal life (an inheritance is not something that is earned as a wage). In Hebrews 5:9, Jesus has become a source of eternal salvation for those who obey him. In Revelation 22:14, those who obeyed God's commandments are give the right to eat from the Tree of Life. In Romans 2:6-7, those who persist in doing good will be given eternal life. In Romans 6:19-23, no longer presenting ourselves as slaves to impurity, lawlessness, and sin is contrasted with now presenting ourselves as slaves to God and to righteousness leading to sanctification and the goal of sanctification is eternal life in Christ, which is the gift of God, so the experience of getting to live in obedience to God's law is the content of His gift of eternal life. In other words, the gift of eternal life is the experience of knowing God and Jesus (John 17:3) and the gift of God's law is His instructions for how to have that experience through acting in accordance with His nature (Exodus 33:13, Matthew 7:23), not for how to earn a wage.

What difference does it makes whether first or last, you still have it as a requirement? In Matthew and Luke which you quoted~what Jesus said was true, yet he was truly pointing out that it is impossible to have eternal by keeping the law, because no man can do so, thereby a Saviour was provided for God's elect who did keep it perfectly in word, deeds and thoughts from conception to death! He even shown the young man in Matthew 19 the hidden sin in his heart which made him go away sorrowful~yet the thought he had kept the law form his youth up, but he only kept the letter of the law, not its spiritual application in every word, deeds and thoughts. Neither can any other person, only Christ did.

While I agree that we are not under the law,

No you do not agree! We are not under the law as means of entering into eternal life, only as a rule to live by, for there is no other law as spiritual, good, and holy as the law of God summed up in ten commandments.

Paul spoke about categories of law other than than the Law of God, such as the law of sin and works of the law, so it is important to correctly identify which law he was referring to us as not being under,

Sir, I know that very well, and have taught that truth for almost fifty years. I understand Nehemiah 8:8 2nd Timothy 2:25, etc., not so sure you do as of yet.

interpreting Romans 6:14-15 as referring to the Law of God is giving us a license to sin and would be contrary to what other verses say about being under grace.

I must run but will pick up right here when I return from a short trip of two hours or so.

 

[brightfame52]

What do you think would have been a better word choice between the two?

I have said what I said.

 

[Mr GLee]

You are laboring to corrupt this covenant by inserting man's obedience which was the requirement of first covenant made with Adam and his posterity that came from his loins. We all know what that got us~death, both physical and spiritual~and the second death in the lake of fire, if mercy is not shown by God.

From an annihilation perspective.

Its appointed for all men to die once according to the instrument of death the letter of the law .

The second death the death of death as the instrument. the letter. it kills. . . the do not or you will really die . . not suffer forever.
.
Death will not raise up in the new order and again corrupt a whole creation.

On the third day God seeing pride in the god of this world departed and corruption began. Day four created the two lights winding down to the last day under the sun .The assigned corruption timekeepers Ring ring wake up call for the believer time to receive the promise of the incorruptible body. Not subject to the law of death

Death with its dying (sufferings). . . hell gone like the wind forever. . . . .

 

[Soyeong]

The same letter that kills gives life through the law of faith .(2 laws working as one new perfect) . ."Let there be" and "it was God alone good" the one Faithful and True Creator

Hello, if we are to interpret 2 Corinthians 3:6 in a way that is in accordance with the abundance of verses that say that obedience to God's law brings life, then there must be a correct manner of obeying it that leads to life and an incorrect manner that leads to death. As you noted, faith is the difference and the Law of God was never intended to be obeyed apart from faith. In Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that tithing was something that they ought to be doing while not neglecting weightier matters of the law of justice, mercy, so God's law is intended to teach is how to experience aspects of God's nature, which are the way to know Him, which is eternal life (John 17:3), while neglecting weightier matters of the law leads to death just as assuredly as refusing to submit to it.

 

[Arial]

Hello, if we are to interpret 2 Corinthians 3:6 in a way that is in accordance with the abundance of verses that say that obedience to God's law brings life, then there must be a correct manner of obeying it that leads to life and an incorrect manner that leads to death. As you noted, faith is the difference and the Law of God was never intended to be obeyed apart from faith. In Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that tithing was something that they ought to be doing while not neglecting weightier matters of the law of justice, mercy, so God's law is intended to teach is how to experience aspects of God's nature, which are the way to know Him, which is eternal life (John 17:3), while neglecting weightier matters of the law leads to death just as assuredly as refusing to submit to it.

Are you saying that it is obedience plus faith that brings salvation? That obedience without faith brings death and that faith without obedience brings death?

There is no such thing as faith without obedience.

And because I have run across it before, and it was very hard to decipher because it was deliberately hidden, do you believe that it is mandatory for the Christian to keep Sabbaths, feast days, and dietary laws that were in the old covenant with Israel?

 

[Soyeong]

It just seems that you are saying two opposing things. You agree with salvation by grace through faith apart from works, and at the same time say it is necessary to keep the Law. Which I take to mean the Mosaic covenant law, but then you appear to not mean that either. I think the confusion comes from your insistence that salvation by grace apart from God's law is a license to sin. And here I think you do mean the Mosaic Law, but not keeping it, just loving it. Rather than hating it. I don't know any Christians who do hate it. And no true believer would ever not want to obey God's law concerning what is sinful. We are not always able to do it-----and I see the legal moral aspects of the Mosaic law given as imperatives, not law, on how a child of God is to order his thinking and how we should conduct ourselves with one another and in the world as His image bearers in the NT---but we are convicted of sin when we sin. A work of the Holy Spirit who is perfecting our faith. Slowly sin is put to death in us as well as in the present, having no power to condemn us.

So anyway, it often sounds like you are presenting salvation by works. By law keeping.

In Deuteronomy 5:31-33, Moses wrote down everything that God said to him without departing from it, so the Law of Moses is the Law of God and it is referred to as such as in verses like Nehemiah 8:1-8, Ezra 7:6-12, and Luke 2:22-23, so I speak about them interchangeably.

Salvation by works is the position that we are required to have first obeyed God's law in order to become saved as the result as through our salvation could be earned as a wage. While there are many verses that deny the truth of that position, there are nevertheless also many verses that make it clear that our salvation requires to choose to be doers of the law, so there must be a reason why our salvation requires us to choose to be doers of the law other than in order to earn our salvation as a wage. For example, in Hebrews 5:9, Jesus has become a source of eternal for those who obey Him, so it is clear that obedience to Jesus is required for eternal salvation, but not in order to earn it as a wage.

While Paul denied in Romans 4:1-5 that we can earn our justification as a wage, he also said in Romans 2:13 that only doers of the law will be justified, so there must be a reason why our justification requires us to choose to be doers of the law other than in order to earn it as a wage, such as faith insofar as the faith by which we are justified does not abolish our need to be a doer of the law, but rather our faith upholds it (Romans 3:28-31). In other words, we become someone who will be justified, someone who has faith, and someone who is a doer of the law all at the same time, someone who is not one is also not the others, and we become someone who will be justified apart from being required to have first been a doer of the law as though it were earned as a wage.

While Abraham believed God, so he was justified (Genesis 15:6), it is also true that he believed God, so he obeyed God's command to offer Isaac (Hebrews 11:17), so the same faith by which he was justified was also expressed as obedience to God, but he did not earn his justification as the result of having first obeyed God as through it were earned as a wage (Romans 4:1-5). In James 2:21-24, Abraham was justified by his works when he offered Isaac, his faith was active along with his works, and his faith complete his works, so he was justified by his works insofar as they were the expression of his faith, but not insofar as they were earning a wage.

Saying that we are under grace and not the Mosaic Law is saying that we have a license to do what God has revealed to be sin through the Mosaic Law, so if we do not have a license to sin, then Romans 6:14 should not be interpreted as referring to not being under the Mosaic Law, but rather the law where sin had dominion over us is the law of sin. God is sovereign, so while we should obey God's law because we love Him, someone is nevertheless still obligated to obey Him even if they don't love Him. I've spoken with many Christians who speak against obeying the Mosaic Law and who act like God gave it as a curse to His children.

 

[Soyeong]

Are you saying that it is obedience plus faith that brings salvation? That obedience without faith brings death and that faith without obedience brings death?

There is no such thing as faith without obedience.

No. Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and sin is the transgression of God's law (1 John 3:4), so while we do not need to have first obeyed it in order to result in our salvation, living in obedience to it through faith in Jesus is nevertheless intrinsically part of the concept of him saving us from not living in obedience to it.

In Proverbs 3:5-7, we have a choice between leaning on our own understanding of right and wrong by doing what is right in our own eyes or trusting in God with all of our heart to correctly divide between right and wrong through obeying what He has instructed in all of our ways and He will make our way straight. So that is what it means to have faith, not something that we need to add in addition to our faith as if our faith were not sufficient for salvation. However, someone can go through the motions of obeying God's law for reasons other than faith, so that does not necessarily mean that they have faith. Someone can claim to have faith in God to guide them in how to rightly live, but if their actions are not in accordance with their claim, then their faith is dead and not really faith in the first place (James 2:17-18).

And because I have run across it before, and it was very hard to decipher because it was deliberately hidden, do you believe that it is mandatory for the Christian to keep Sabbaths, feast days, and dietary laws that were in the old covenant with Israel?

Sorry if I was not clear. It is mandatory for Christians to refrain from sin (Romans 6:15), sin is the transgression of God's law (1 John 3:4), and God's law includes commands in regard to those things as part of the New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:33). If a Gentile were not under the Mosaic Law, then they would have no need to repent from doing what it reveals to be sin, they would have no need of salvation from sin, they would have no need of the Gospel message, they would have no need of grace, and they would have no need of Jesus to have given himself to redeem us from all lawlessness.

 

[Mr GLee]

Are you saying that it is obedience plus faith that brings salvation? That obedience without faith brings death and that faith without obedience brings death?

There is no such thing as faith without obedience.

And because I have run across it before, and it was very hard to decipher because it was deliberately hidden, do you believe that it is mandatory for the Christian to keep Sabbaths, feast days, and dietary laws that were in the old covenant with Israel?

I would think those believers who were moved performed those shadows as law limited to ceremonies a sign to the whole world not just the Jewish world themselves They knew God was uses them as a sign to the world of a sufferings savaior before hand looking to the glory of the matter when the shadow disappeared .Not a sign unto themselves they ha d prophecy that was moving them to do the work our father required they di not look to signs,

I am no expert but thier is much confusion two different kinds of laws as usual satan makes what God calls separate all as one in the sam

Like a two sided coin analogy one hidden in ceremonies as parables comparing the things seen the temporal historical with the unseen eternal glory.

In the ten commandments. . two are clearly ceremonial God uses the witness of two throughout to respect he has spoken .
God does not give reasons in moral laws to do not murder do not serve other gods do not lust after the things of this word.

But when it comes to the word rest as a gos[el fast rest a non time sensitive words. The weekly shadow became today in Hebrew 4 today if you mix the unseen thing of God with the temporal thing here and do not harden our hearts we have enter rest (7th day

To the law below
Exodus 20:11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

and it prophecy below Move out ...let there be and it was God good

Deuteronomy 5: 15 And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day.

faith power of God

1 Peter 1:7-11 That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ: Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory:Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls. Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.


Again everything that made up the ceremony was connected as metaphors to the sufferings of Christ beforehand and the glory that follow. we thankfully can look back to it, they by same same Spirit of faith Christ looked ahead
Beautiful gospel parable in 1 Peter

 

[Soyeong]

What do you mean by you became a Messianic? I know the meaning of the word. Do your mean Messianic Judaism? If so, what precise beliefs do you keep from Judaism?

Indeed, Jesus set a perfect example of how to practice Judaism by living in sinless obedience to the Torah and Messianic Judaism is the form of Judaism that recognizes him a the Jewish Messiah in fulfillment of Jewish prophecy, which is made up of members who seek to follow the religion that he practiced in the manner that he practiced it. In Acts 21:20, they were rejoicing that tens of thousands of Jews were coming to faith who were all zealous for the Torah, which is in accordance with believing in what Jesus gave himself to accomplish through the cross (Titus 2:14), so Jews coming to faith in the Jewish Messiah were not ceasing to practice Judaism. This means that there was a period of time between the resurrection of Jesus and the inclusion of Gentiles in Acts 10 that is estimated to be around 7-15 years during which all Christians were Torah observant Jews, which means that Christianity at its origin was the form of Judaism that recognized Jesus as the Messiah.

In Acts 23:6, Paul identified as a Pharisee and Pharisees are people who practice Judaism, which means that most of the books of the NT were written by a Pharisee who practiced Judaism, and in 1 Corinthians 11:1, we are instructed to be imitators of him as he is an imitator of Christ, so we are instructed to be imitators of a Pharisee. In Matthew 23:2-4, Jesus recognize the authority of the Pharisees by saying that they sit in the Seat of Moses and instructing his followers to observe and do all that they say, but warned against their pride and hypocrisy, though there were other Pharisees who also spoke against that. In the debate between the house of Hillel and Shammai, Jesus was virtually in complete agreement with Hillel. In Acts 24:14, "The Way" is a sect of Judaism, so it is hard to precisely answer your question when Christianity is part of Judaism.

I did explain how the two relate and why those under the law and who were being trained by the Mosaic Law would wrote about it in the way that they do, and refer to it. All those Psalms are applicable to those in the new covenant by extension, though many also were applied to specific historical events the psalmists were relating to. I read through the Psalms and when I reach the end, turn around and start at the beginning again. But where they refer to the Mosaic Law (which is what they learned about God through, plus all the book of the Law and Prophets,) for those in the new covenant not under that Law, when it says Law, for us, it means all He says and all He does. Of course we delight in it. I find in them how well they truly knew God, and how very much of who God is and our covenant relationship with Him. For bottom line, they all deal with a covenant relationship and how God views and treats and cares for His covenant children. I learn about God in them.

However you found the connection between old and new testament is wonderful. We are all different. I see not disconnect and the connection has only strengthened as I have grown by being in His word. The Bible is one book, containing many books but it is all, from beginning to end the same story unfolding. See my thread Scripture Interprets Scripture. If you were taught to interpret the NT with a negative slant towards the Law, that is a fault with your teachers. I personally have never encountered that. And the baby does not need to be thrown out with the bath water.

By seeing that God has given wise laws we learn that God is wise, and the same is true of any other attribute that we could use to describe God's laws, and as representatives of God we should live in a way that testifies about His attributes by obeying His laws. For example, our good works testify about God's goodness, which is why they give glory to Him (Matthew 5:16). In 1 Peter 1:16, we are told to be holy for God is holy, which is a quote from Leviticus where God was giving instructions for how to do that, such as by refraining from eating unclean animals (Leviticus 11:44-45) or keeping God's Sabbaths holy (Leviticus 19:2-3), so by following those instructions we are testifying that the God that we follow is holy, while someone who refuses to follow those instructions is bearing false witness against God by testifying that the God that they follow is not holy. Many people argue against following these laws.

 

[Arial]

No. Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and sin is the transgression of God's law (1 John 3:4), so while we do not need to have first obeyed it in order to result in our salvation, living in obedience to it through faith in Jesus is nevertheless intrinsically part of the concept of him saving us from not living in obedience to it.

In Proverbs 3:5-7, we have a choice between leaning on our own understanding of right and wrong by doing what is right in our own eyes or trusting in God with all of our heart to correctly divide between right and wrong through obeying what He has instructed in all of our ways and He will make our way straight. So that is what it means to have faith, not something that we need to add in addition to our faith as if our faith were not sufficient for salvation. However, someone can go through the motions of obeying God's law for reasons other than faith, so that does not necessarily mean that they have faith. Someone can claim to have faith in God to guide them in how to rightly live, but if their actions are not in accordance with their claim, then their faith is dead and not really faith in the first place (James 2:17-18).


Sorry if I was not clear. It is mandatory for Christians to refrain from sin (Romans 6:15), sin is the transgression of God's law (1 John 3:4), and God's law includes commands in regard to those things as part of the New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:33). If a Gentile were not under the Mosaic Law, then they would have no need to repent from doing what it reveals to be sin, they would have no need of salvation from sin, they would have no need of the Gospel message, they would have no need of grace, and they would have no need of Jesus to have given himself to redeem us from all lawlessness.

Given all of the above, why do you call the gospel of grace a false gospel and keep pressing the point? The gospel of grace does not teach that it is ok to sin. If a person took it to mean a license to sin it would indicate they did not have faith. Obviously for it would deny who Jesus is and He would not be Lord, but a figure head, a supposed way of escaping the judgement of God on sin.

What seems to be missing in your arguments, and I may be wrong, only you can clear it up, is the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the believer that destroys the power of sin to condemn them, and the power of the grave to hold them. It does not give a license to sin but seals the believer in Christ while we live in this flesh, in this fallen world that is full of the influence of the devil. We still have for now, our sinful nature, and it is inevitable that we will sometimes sin. It is the One who indwells us who convicts us of this sin, or disciplines if musts be. It is in His word that we find out what sin is, and we acknowledge our sin, repent of our sin, and are forgiven for Jesus' sake, who took upon Himself their penalty.

It is the ongoing process of sanctification, also a work of the Holy Spirit, while at the same time we become doers of the word. And we will never arrive at perfect obedience this side of His return.

 

[Arial]

In Deuteronomy 5:31-33, Moses wrote down everything that God said to him without departing from it, so the Law of Moses is the Law of God and it is referred to as such as in verses like Nehemiah 8:1-8, Ezra 7:6-12, and Luke 2:22-23, so I speak about them interchangeably.

Salvation by works is the position that we are required to have first obeyed God's law in order to become saved as the result as through our salvation could be earned as a wage. While there are many verses that deny the truth of that position, there are nevertheless also many verses that make it clear that our salvation requires to choose to be doers of the law, so there must be a reason why our salvation requires us to choose to be doers of the law other than in order to earn our salvation as a wage. For example, in Hebrews 5:9, Jesus has become a source of eternal for those who obey Him, so it is clear that obedience to Jesus is required for eternal salvation, but not in order to earn it as a wage.

While Paul denied in Romans 4:1-5 that we can earn our justification as a wage, he also said in Romans 2:13 that only doers of the law will be justified, so there must be a reason why our justification requires us to choose to be doers of the law other than in order to earn it as a wage, such as faith insofar as the faith by which we are justified does not abolish our need to be a doer of the law, but rather our faith upholds it (Romans 3:28-31). In other words, we become someone who will be justified, someone who has faith, and someone who is a doer of the law all at the same time, someone who is not one is also not the others, and we become someone who will be justified apart from being required to have first been a doer of the law as though it were earned as a wage.

While Abraham believed God, so he was justified (Genesis 15:6), it is also true that he believed God, so he obeyed God's command to offer Isaac (Hebrews 11:17), so the same faith by which he was justified was also expressed as obedience to God, but he did not earn his justification as the result of having first obeyed God as through it were earned as a wage (Romans 4:1-5). In James 2:21-24, Abraham was justified by his works when he offered Isaac, his faith was active along with his works, and his faith complete his works, so he was justified by his works insofar as they were the expression of his faith, but not insofar as they were earning a wage.

Saying that we are under grace and not the Mosaic Law is saying that we have a license to do what God has revealed to be sin through the Mosaic Law, so if we do not have a license to sin, then Romans 6:14 should not be interpreted as referring to not being under the Mosaic Law, but rather the law where sin had dominion over us is the law of sin. God is sovereign, so while we should obey God's law because we love Him, someone is nevertheless still obligated to obey Him even if they don't love Him. I've spoken with many Christians who speak against obeying the Mosaic Law and who act like God gave it as a curse to His children.

Our good works following our conversion are a result of our conversion, not a requirement in conversion along with faith. It is a covenant not based on laws. If we belong to Christ, we naturally emulate Him. It is the Good Vine producing the good fruit.

 

[Mr GLee]

No. Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and sin is the transgression of God's law (1 John 3:4), so while we do not need to have first obeyed it in order to result in our salvation, living in obedience to it through faith in Jesus is nevertheless intrinsically part of the concept of him saving us from not living in obedience to it.

In Proverbs 3:5-7, we have a choice between leaning on our own understanding of right and wrong by doing what is right in our own eyes or trusting in God with all of our heart to correctly divide between right and wrong through obeying what He has instructed in all of our ways and He will make our way straight. So that is what it means to have faith, not something that we need to add in addition to our faith as if our faith were not sufficient for salvation. However, someone can go through the motions of obeying God's law for reasons other than faith, so that does not necessarily mean that they have faith. Someone can claim to have faith in God to guide them in how to rightly live, but if their actions are not in accordance with their claim, then their faith is dead and not really faith in the first place (James 2:17-18).


Sorry if I was not clear. It is mandatory for Christians to refrain from sin (Romans 6:15), sin is the transgression of God's law (1 John 3:4), and God's law includes commands in regard to those things as part of the New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:33). If a Gentile were not under the Mosaic Law, then they would have no need to repent from doing what it reveals to be sin, they would have no need of salvation from sin, they would have no need of the Gospel message, they would have no need of grace, and they would have no need of Jesus to have given himself to redeem us from all lawlessness.

I would offer. both . . two laws working as one perfect new law. Christ the just law giver the letter . . .death (thou shall not or you will surely die and never rise to new life)_ and the spirit or law of faith the justifier.

New creation, new heart desire , In Hebrew 6 he comforts informing his children of the better things that acompanies salvation in so much he will not forget the good works we can offer towards his name our burden lifter . Same God who brings to our memory the former thing he taught we preach

Hebrews 6:9-10 But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak.
For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love, which ye have shewed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister.

The faithful Creator two laws become one Perfect

Romans 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

 

[Soyeong]

Eternal life under the New Covenant has no requirement~it is a covenant based on two immutable acts of God~his oath and promises, the very same two immutable acts toward Abraham concerning his son Isaac, who was a perfect type of all children of God's promises.

By saying that, you are denying the truth of many verses that say that eternal life requires our obedience to God's law.

You are laboring to corrupt this covenant by inserting man's obedience which was the requirement of first covenant made with Adam and his posterity that came from his loins. We all know what that got us~death, both physical and spiritual~and the second death in the lake of fire, if mercy is not shown by God.

I am not laboring to corrupt this covenant. In Genesis 18:19, God knew Abraham because he would teach his children and those of his household to walk in His way by doing righteousness and justice that the Lord may bring to him all that he has promise. In Genesis 26:4-5, God will bless Abraham's children as the starts in the heaven, to his children He will give all of these lands, and through his children all of the nations of the earth will be blessed because he heard God's voice and guarded His commandments, statutes, and laws. In Deuteronomy 30:16, if the children of Abraham will love God with all of their heart by walking in His way in obedience to His commandments, statutes, and laws, then they will live and multiply and God will bless them in the land that they go to possess. So the promise was made to Abraham and brought about because he walked in God's way in obedience to His law, he taught his children and those of his household to do that, and because they did that.

What difference does it makes whether first or last, you still have it as a requirement? In Matthew and Luke which you quoted~what Jesus said was true, yet he was truly pointing out that it is impossible to have eternal by keeping the law, because no man can do so, thereby a Saviour was provided for God's elect who did keep it perfectly in word, deeds and thoughts from conception to death! He even shown the young man in Matthew 19 the hidden sin in his heart which made him go away sorrowful~yet the thought he had kept the law form his youth up, but he only kept the letter of the law, not its spiritual application in every word, deeds and thoughts. Neither can any other person, only Christ did.

There are many verses that deny that we can earn our justification/righteousness/salvation/eternal life as the result of our obedience and many verses that say that they require our obedience, so the key is to understanding the correct relationship. If we could earn those things as a wage, then we could boast in ourselves and God would owe those things to us in return for what we have done for Him. In Deuteronomy 30:11-20, it says that God's law is not too difficult for us to obey and that obedience brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse, so choose life! So Jesus did not say that it is impossible to have eternal life by keeping the law, but rather he was affirming Deuteronomy and saying that with God all things are possible.

No you do not agree! We are not under the law as means of entering into eternal life, only as a rule to live by, for there is no other law as spiritual, good, and holy as the law of God summed up in ten commandments.

According to Romans 6:14, we are not under the law where sin had dominion over us, which I agree with. Paul was not denying that we under the law as a means of eternizing eternal life especially because obedience to God's law is the content of God's gift of eternal life in Romans 6:19-23. A sum is inclusive of all of its parts.

Sir, I know that very well, and have taught that truth for almost fifty years. I understand Nehemiah 8:8 2nd Timothy 2:25, etc., not so sure you do as of yet.

That's good, then please interact with what I said about Romans 6:14 referring to the law of sin rather than the Law of God. In regard to 2 Timothy 2:25, in Psalms 119:142, God's law is truth, so God granting us repentance from transgressing it is the way to come to knowledge of the truth.

I must run but will pick up right here when I return from a short trip of two hours or so.

Catch you later.

 

[Red Baker]

By saying that, you are denying the truth of many verses that say that eternal life requires our obedience to God's law.

Soyeong,

You do not hear the law speaking clearly!

Galatians 4:21~"Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?"

Soyeong~Which of Abraham's two Sons was the true heir of Abraham? The one born after the energy of his flesh? Or, the son of God's oath and promise to him? One born of the bondwoman or the freewoman? Hear the word of God, if you truly desire to know the truth.

Galatians 4:22-31~"For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. (The New Covenant of pure grace based on two immutable acts of God, his oath, and his promises) For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free."

The very elect are children of FREE GRACE secured by two immutable acts of God, his holy oath, which it is impossible for God to lie, and his promises of grace to the seed of Jesus Christ. Read for much more truth along this very point.

I am not laboring to corrupt this covenant

But you are, saying:

you are denying the truth of many verses that say that eternal life requires our obedience to God's law.

The word of God rejects your teachings that eternal life requires our obedience to God's law.

Question for you~How much obedience on our part is required? Should we have the same faith and obedience as Abraham had, or Lot? Obedience is a very subjected work to trust in~since all of God's children are on different levels of obedience not two people are the same. Besides, perfect obedience is require before one can enter into life, and only Christ thad that and he was the surety before God's holy law for all of God's elect. We all enter into eternal life clothed in the righteousness of Jesus Christ from Lot to Abraham, to the least to John the Baptist, etc.

In Genesis 26:4-5, God will bless Abraham's children as the starts in the heaven, to his children He will give all of these lands, and through his children all of the nations of the earth will be blessed because he heard God's voice and guarded His commandments, statutes, and laws. In Deuteronomy 30:16, if the children of Abraham will love God with all of their heart by walking in His way in obedience to His commandments, statutes, and laws, then they will live and multiply and God will bless them in the land that they go to possess. So the promise was made to Abraham and brought about because he walked in God's way in obedience to His law, he taught his children and those of his household to do that, and because they did that.

Your Messianic Judaism is coming out~which we reject. The promises to Abraham was to his seed which is CHRIST, and his people which are equally Jews AND GENTILES, another message for another day.

I see why you are cleaving to the law as a requirement of obedience to eternal life. Why would any Gentile desire to go back to the law with one hand and to the NT with the other and try to use them both to promise eternal life to sinners, when the book of Galatians warns them of doing so~we should stand in doubt of such people.

In Acts 23:6, Paul identified as a Pharisee and Pharisees are people who practice Judaism, which means that most of the books of the NT were written by a Pharisee who practiced Judaism, and in 1 Corinthians 11:1, we are instructed to be imitators of him as he is an imitator of Christ, so we are instructed to be imitators of a Pharisee. In Matthew 23:2-4, Jesus recognize the authority of the Pharisees by saying that they sit in the Seat of Moses and instructing his followers to observe and do all that they say, but warned against their pride and hypocrisy, though there were other Pharisees who also spoke against that. In the debate between the house of Hillel and Shammai, Jesus was virtually in complete agreement with Hillel. In Acts 24:14, "The Way" is a sect of Judaism, so it is hard to precisely answer your question when Christianity is part of Judaism.

Again~Your Messianic Judaism is coming out~which we reject. Christianity and Judaism are not even the same, not even close.

Philippians 3:1-9~"Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. To write the same things to you, to me indeed is not grievous, but for you it is safe. Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision. For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh. Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more: Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ. Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:"

Modern day Messianic Judaism would fall under Paul's stern warnings here in the first nine verses of this epistle. If you would like let us consider these scriptures and go from here.

 

[Soyeong]

Soyeong~Which of Abraham's two Sons was the true heir of Abraham? The one born after the energy of his flesh? Or, the son of God's oath and promise to him? One born of the bondwoman or the freewoman? Hear the word of God, if you truly desire to know the truth.

The very elect are children of FREE GRACE secured by two immutable acts of God, his holy oath, which it is impossible for God to lie, and his promises of grace to the seed of Jesus Christ. Read for much more truth along this very point.

If God saved the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt in order to put them under bondage to His law, then it would be for bondage that God sets us free, however, Galatians 5:1 says that it is for freedom that God sets us free, which completely undermines how you are interpreting Galatians 4:21-31. Furthermore, the Torah came through the line of the free woman, not the line of the slave woman. In Psalms 119:142, God's law is truth, and in John 8:31-36, it is sin in transgression of God's law that puts us in bondage while it is the truth that sets us free.

I've also shown through Genesis 18:19, Genesis 26:4-5, and Deuteronomy 30:16 that the promise is directly connected with living in God's way in obedience to His law. Moreover, God is gracious to us by teaching us to obey His law (Psalms 119:29, Exodus 33:13, Genesis 6:8-9, Romans 1:5, Titus 2:11-14).

The word of God rejects your teachings that eternal life requires our obedience to God's law.

Question for you~How much obedience on our part is required?

I've quoted many verses to support that the word of God supports that obedience to it is required for eternal life, so if you disagree with my position without explaining why you think that I've misunderstood the verses that I used to support it, then you are disagreeing with those verses.

The content of a gift can itself be the experience of doing something, such as giving someone the opportunity to experience driving a Ferrari for an hour, where the gift requires them to do the work of driving it in order to have that experience, but where doing that work does not detract from the opportunity to drive it being given to them as a gift. Similarly, the content of God's gift of eternal life is the experience of knowing God and Jesus (John 17:3) and the gift of God's law is His instructions for how to have that experience (Exodus 33:13, Matthew 7:23). So obedience to God's law has nothing to do with being required to do a certain amount first in order to earn eternal life as the result, but rather it is about having a relationship with God through experiencing His nature. Nowhere does the Bible say that we can earn eternal life as a wage if we manage to have perfect obedience.

Your Messianic Judaism is coming out~which we reject. The promises to Abraham was to his seed which is CHRIST, and his people which are equally Jews AND GENTILES, another message for another day.

Just because you claim that my Messianic Judaism is coming out does not mean that the verses that I quoted are wrong.

In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Torah was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message, which is in accordance with Jesus being sent as the promised seed to bless us by turning us from our wickedness (Acts 3:25-26), which is the Gospel that was made known in advance to Abraham in accordance with the promise (Galatians 3:8), which he taught to Gentiles in Haran in accordance with the promise (Genesis 12:1-5). In Psalms 119:1-3, the Torah is how the children of Abraham knew how to be blessed by walking in God's way, and in John 8:39, Jesus said that if they were children of Abraham, then they would be doing the same works as him, so the way that the children of Abraham are multiplied and are a blessing to the nations in accordance with being heirs of the promise is not through having many physical descendants, but through turning the nations from their wickedness and by teaching them to do the same works as Abraham by walking in God's way in obedience to the Torah.

I see why you are cleaving to the law as a requirement of obedience to eternal life. Why would any Gentile desire to go back to the law with one hand and to the NT with the other and try to use them both to promise eternal life to sinners, when the book of Galatians warns them of doing so~we should stand in doubt of such people.

I hold to that view because I've quoted many verses from the Bible that support it. The Psalms express an extremely positive view of the Torah, such as with David repeatedly saying that he loved it and delighted in obeying it, so if we consider the Psalms to be Scripture and to therefore express a correct view of it, then we will share it as Paul did (Romans 7:22), and a Gentile who has that view of the Torah will consider the Gospel that Jesus spread that called for our repentance from our disobedience to it to be very good news. All throughout the Bible, God wanted His people to repent and to return to obedience to the Torah, and even Jesus began his ministry with that Gospel message, so it is absurd to interpret Galatians as Paul warning us against doing that.

Again~Your Messianic Judaism is coming out~which we reject. Christianity and Judaism are not even the same, not even close.

Again, claiming that does not show that what I said was wrong.

Modern day Messianic Judaism would fall under Paul's stern warnings here in the first nine verses of this epistle. If you would like let us consider these scriptures and go from here.

Knowing God and Jesus is the goal of the Torah (Exodus 33:13, Matthew 7:23), which is eternal life (John 17:3), so Philippians 3:1-9 should not be interpreted as saying that we just need to know Jesus and that obedience to the Torah is rubbish, but rather Paul had been obeying the Torah without being focused on knowing Jesus, so he had been missing the whole goal of the Torah and that is what he counted as rubbish.

 

[Red Baker]

If God saved the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt in order to put them under bondage to His law, then it would be for bondage that God sets us free,

That was a good comeback, but falls short of giving your work gospel any support whatsoever.

God did save them from their Egyptian bondage, which was a type of the sinners bondage to sin. Yet, they also knew how they would ultimately be saved from their sins~Under the first covenant the Jews' religion had its ordinances of divine services, ansd a worldly sanctuary.

Hebrews9:2-10~"For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary. And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all; Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant; And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly. Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God. But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people: The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation."

Soyeong~the True reformation came at the death and resurrection of the Son of God. Why do you desire to still be under the first covenant, or, at least trying to hold on to both, which truly is impossible.

The law of God summed up in ten commandments cannot give life to those seeking to be under it. Again, as I asked above~do you not hear the law?

Galatians 3:10-24~"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: That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto. Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise. Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith."

Soyeong~Let's us consider these scriptures moving forward and then I will address the rest of your post, but if we consider these scriptures your house of cards will fall if interpreted according to the word of God, which you said above that Galatians is the most misunderstood epistle, which I believe it is, on people's part that wants to put us under the bondage of God's law as a means of entering into eternal life.