The Weekend Word

You may also like...

63 Responses

  1. uriahisaliveandwell says:

    Bible says Jesustells us but he did not put it into the law, but but rather came to fulfill it. That is to pay or atone for the sins of those who would repent and live a life in and of that which he calls, holy. By He who is gi en to those who truly are born again.

  2. uriahisaliveandwell says:

    end to the law

  3. #1 = totally wrong … but I need to run to church.

    Jesus did not hang on the cross and say “Father forgive those who repent, demonstrate a change of behavior and really, really mean it.”

    Your view of fulfilling the law is wrong. Fulfilling a contract is really the only way to properly end a contract. With Jesus fulfilling the law, there is no more law (in that covenant) that remains binding.

    Check out the baseball free agent list — everyone of them fulfilled their contracts and have absolutely no binding to it. 🙂

  4. Jean says:

    #1 “Bible says Jesustells us but he did not put it into the law, but but rather came to fulfill it. That is to pay or atone for the sins of those who would repent and live a life in and of that which he calls, holy. By He who is gi en to those who truly are born again.”

    What a depressing and gross misinterpretation of the work of Christ, trying to put conditions on the unconditional grace and mercy of God.

    “to pay or atone for the sins of those who would repent and live a life … holy”

    Who did Jesus pay? What kind of gift requires payment? How can salvation be by grace if it requires a payment?

    Who would repent? “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” The world means the **whole** world. “Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.” “All” means all.

    Who would live a life in and of that which he calls, holy? So Christ’s death on the cross doesn’t save? Christians contribute to their salvation? How holy do I have to be? How do I know if I’m living holy enough? Nope. Grace is a gift.

  5. Paige says:

    Thank you. This is The Only Hope for this life and the life to come.

  6. Em says:

    the sin debt is paid – what a price – what holy and unfathomable love is the love of God … amazing love, how can it be that God should die for us? (that’s a beautiful, Holy Spirit inspired old hymn)
    how very sad to not respond and receive redemption … how very sad to think that one earn the favor of the One who ultimately made and owns everything – even the dirt we walk on – how sad to think to please God, blowing people to smithereens in order to earn God’s favor

  7. Uriahisaliveandwell says:

    Jean,

    Appreciate your response and understand that many see it the way you have responded, however:

    “What a depressing and gross misinterpretation of the work of Christ, trying to put conditions on the unconditional grace and mercy of God.

    What is depressing about putting away the old man, living in and by the power and guidance of the Holy Spirit, according to that which Christ Jesus has shown us to do and enable us by sending to those who would believe the Holy Spirit. That’s freedom to choose to walk and abide in Him, living a Holy and sanctified life, which by the grace of the Father provided through His Son through the blood sacrifice made once and for all (who would believe and receive.

    “to pay or atone for the sins of those who would repent and live a life … holy”

    Who did Jesus pay? What kind of gift requires payment? How can salvation be by grace if it requires a payment?

    Are you saying it did not cost Jesus anything to lay His life down? It is by God’s grace that He provided a ransom ( Jesus = Lamb) to pay that which could not be paid by the means of the sacrifices once used to cover the sins of the Jewish people. Nor could the “good works” earn or pay for one’s salvation or reconciliation with the Father. Grace is an attribute of God and in that attribute is manifested a way for all who would come, repent, and believe to be set free, to be able to be reconciled to Him and set free from the bondage and temptation that sin once had upon a person. It is a gift because, we who do repent and receive Christ, Jesus into our hearts, could do nothing to earn this freeing of our souls to walk in Him, but simply to choose to surrender our heart and our lives to Him, who was the only blood sacrifice that could.

    Who would repent? “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” The world means the **whole** world. “Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.” “All” means all.”

    This salvation is available to all, however, and this is a big however, for scripture also tells us, whosoever will, as well as, “many,” not all will be made righteous. Without repentance, there is no salvation. There is a big difference between saying that Jesus died for the whole world and took away the sins of all vs. saying that Jesus died for the whole world to make a way for them, if they would surrender their hearts to receive and to walk in Him. The first speaks of universalism and the second speaks of those who would turn their hearts truly towards Him and walk in Him.

    Who would live a life in and of that which he calls, holy? So Christ’s death on the cross doesn’t save? Christians contribute to their salvation? How holy do I have to be? How do I know if I’m living holy enough? Nope. Grace is a gift.

    Grace is an attribute of God. Christ’s death on the cross saves those who would repent, believe and walk in Him. Upon receiving the Holy Spirit, we are made a new person, and we strive, by that which enables us (HS) to do His will, putting away that which is not of Him, and hating that which not of Him. Jesus made it clear, we must be born again, not of the flesh, but of the Holy Spirit. Having the Holy Spirit and knowing His Word, guides us into knowing if we are walking and abiding in Him. Before this, we only could rely upon our own experience and reasoning. It’s not an issue of “being” holy enough. That only sets one up to excuse sin and to give way to it instead of striving to find reasons not to sin and to wallow in it.

    In Him, we are made perfect and righteous, but it is up to us to choose who we will serve and it is by surrendering our heart and life to that which He has called us to do, to walk in obedience to that which means to no longer walk in darkness, but to put away that which hinders us from truly coming to that great salvation wrought through the cross, because of God’s grace and so many other attributes He possesses, along with that of being a just God who will separate the chaff from the wheat, the goats from the sheep, and those who refused to enter into that narrow gate, but deceived themselves that they could enter in that wide gate that Jesus tells us that leads to destruction.

    The sacrifice of the Lamb did not destroy the Law, but only fulfilled it. That is, the wages of sins leads to death. In Him, we find freedom not to sin, but if (not when), we do sin, there is at the foot of the cross, we can find forgiveness, if we repent (not just with our lips, but with our whole hearts), and then be washed clean, renewing our minds and once again giving thanks for the great price He, alone paid to make this so. In this, we are made righteous in His sight able to do His will and hating that which once separated us from Him.

  8. Uriahisaliveandwell says:

    “Jesus did not hang on the cross and say “Father forgive those who repent, demonstrate a change of behavior and really, really mean it.”

    Of course, Jesus did not say this. This is the reasoning that stop short of God’s ability to know the heart of a person who is truly repentant and is surrendering their life to receive that which was given by His grace through the debt that Jesus was now in the process of doing on the behalf of all who would repent, believe, and then receive unto Him, and then through Him and the Holy Spirit. And as a result of this, that person would walk and abide in Him, manifesting that of a changed heart and no longer that which is of the flesh, the world, and that which is the prince of darkness.

    God, the Father knows who these are, just as He knows who He will use to bring about that plan He has put in place long before the earth was formed and man was created. To pose what Jesus said to our Father, in terms of an earthly perspective, misses the mark entirely.

  9. Em says:

    or to put it another way … Ephesians 4:2-10

  10. Em says:

    well, sorry about transposing those numbers … i meant to reference Ephesians 2:4-10
    salvation is the gift, grace is the means by which God can reach us and faith is our response or to put it directionally, grace comes down from heaven and faith goes up 🙂

  11. Uriahisaliveandwell says:

    God provides the way. Does not force anyone. It is a choice. All do not choose, but all are called or rather, He is made known to them by one way or another. He does not change, nor is He held hostage or compromised. His grace provided the way, not all will choose to surrender to this. Faith without works is dead. As He has declared, “more than sacrifice, more than praise, bring a willing heart, ready to obey. If it by faith that we believe and in this faith, our belief is manifested by our the thoughts and behaviors we manifested towards that which bring glory, honor, and praise to Him. Not the world, the flesh, or to he who would rob us of our very souls.

    Romans 1 and 2, 3, 6, and 8

  12. Uriah,
    “of God’s ability to know the heart of a person who is truly repentant and is surrendering their life to receive that which was given by His grace through the debt that Jesus was now in the process of doing on the behalf of all who would repent, believe, and then receive unto Him, and then through Him and the Holy Spirit. And as a result of this, that person would walk and abide in Him, manifesting that of a changed heart and no longer that which is of the flesh, the world, and that which is the prince of darkness.

    I have no idea of what that means or who that is. I know of no one who has followed Jesus with ALL their Heart and who have stopped sinning through having a new heart (if you have a new heart then you are incapable of sinning.)

    I still go back to Jesus fulfilled the law which means we are no longer obligated to the law and I refuse, although it is taught in many churches that Jesus is the new Moses – the new lawgiver.

  13. Uriah,
    If what you say is true then there was no need for a new covenant, a new priesthood or a new High Priest. According to your thoughts everything is the same from the beginning – those who do it right (Abel) are in God’s favor, those who do not do right (Cain), face God’s wrath.

    For those who don’t do it right, their only salvation may be if they bring the proper sacrifice before God to get their butt out of trouble.

    In other words – Jesus died in vain — nothing changed.

    But this lesson is about that new covenant, that new priesthood and that new office of High Priest.

  14. 15 This becomes even more evident when another priest arises in the likeness of Melchizedek, 16 who has become a priest, not on the basis of a legal requirement concerning bodily descent, but by the power of an indestructible life.

    I think we will see this later maybe ch 8 in the failure of the Old Covenant and why it had to be disposed of, and why it had to be Jesus who fulfilled it and not the people. God purposely place Jesus in the line of Judah and not Levi for this purpose.

  15. Jean says:

    Just like the fact that one cannot put new wine in an old wine skin, there is no place in the new covenant for the Law. Likewise, the Kingdom of God is ruled by the Gospel, not by the Law.

    The Galatians had a problem, similar to Uriah. They thought that God required something additional to what Christ gave them. Basically, Paul told the Galatian Christians if they put conditions on Christ’s forgiveness, they have placed themselves outside of grace. The same thing happens to us if we construct conditions, such as so-called holy living.

    Recall, that in the new birth, you are united to Christ in baptism into his crucifixion and resurrection. You die with him, so that you can walk in the newness of life. Your new life is hidden with God in Christ. You are transferred from the dominion of darkness into the Kingdom of Son in whom you have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. There is absolutely nothing you can add to Christ’s gifts in the eyes of God.

  16. Goose says:

    Jean@ 15 said….

    “Just like the fact that one cannot put new wine in an old wine skin, there is no place in the new covenant for the Law.”

    Respectfully, Jean, please read Hebrews 8, Jeremiah 31, Ezekiel 36, etc., as I think you may be over-committing a bit in regards to your law/new covenant position.

    Simply put, God’s law is an integral part of the new covenant.

  17. Goose says:

    MLD & Jean,

    The Bible defines sin as the transgression of the law.

    Therefore, if one believes that the law has been abolished then one also must believe that there is not sin anymore. For if there is no law, then there is no sin.

    It is therefore illogical to presume that the law of God has been abolished because sin does still exist, as I am sure all would agree.

    To keep from sinning, one must keep from transgressing God’s law.

    We all have a personal choice to make….. either transgress God’s law which is sin, or obey God’s law so as not to sin.

    I suggest that God may be more interested in the latter.

    We don’t obey God’s law to be saved but we obey God’s law because we are saved.

  18. Thank you, Goose.

    Men makes this into something else, simply to avoid having to acknowledge that they do have a choice by up
    Cutting and pasting of scriptures to then crate a theological school of thought then passed down to others whose ears it tickles while enabling blatant sin to thrive under the veil of grace while dismissing the warnings of being obedient and holy people.

  19. Goose – I fail to see why you all cannot grasp the concept of Jesus fulfilling the law. He did not break the contract (covenant) – he fulfilled it. Jesus did not abolish the law, he fulfilled it.

    So I think your confusion comes in because you don’t use the Jesus words.

    I keep trying to use the baseball analogy, but that may be over your head. My Dodgers are losing Zack Greinke to free agency. Why? not because he broke his contract and not because someone abolished his contract — no, because he fulfilled his contract.

    Now I will ask you this – which part of last year’s contract is he bound to? None.

    So if Jesus fulfilled the law for us (fulfilled being the operative word, why do you want to put yourself back under that law? It doesn’t make sense to me, but perhaps it will when you start explaining.

  20. Goose,
    me I use this in quote you or just use this for my own reference to use elsewhere?

  21. Now some have a Jesus, and I don’t know where they get him from, but their Jesus just put away the law so he could bring his own version, so now that this Jesus is the new Moses and he has not brought his grace, but his own new law to put us under.

    I think that jesus is a fake.

  22. Goose, sorry about the typos. again may I use this quote to use elsewhere. So simple, yet clearly explains and puts an end to the idea that once saved we are free to sin because we don’t have choice to do otherwise, along with the idea that sin is no big deal due to grace, although Paul tells us this is not so. Funny how these who do not want to take ownership of the sins they do not want forsake will cling to the grace card, while also believing they have no choice, but to hope God understands.

    I hear this often among addicts who may be clean, but yet truly sober. In other words, they may not be using, but still their thoughts and behavior remain that which enabled and protected them from surrendering and come out using completely. Much like those who think of the law as you have explained in terms of: no law = no sin.

    One other note: that is the one key that helps us to know if we are in Him. that isbecause we are we strive we desire and we seek to walk in obedience putting away the old man hating sin and not making excuse or justification to drell in or to pursue it.

  23. Em says:

    why make this so obtuse, so tangled? man rebelled against his Creator showing himself to be vulnerable to sinning – sin and rebellion go hand in hand – if you have a child or were a child, you know this – BUT,
    if we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us and cleanse us – the Law is like a traffic stop sign… we see it, we obey it sometimes and sometimes we don’t for lots of reasons… and so, the remedy:
    in Christ we can confess and He forgives … He hasn’t taken the stop sign down – He forgives because the debt is already paid by Christ … (aaand running some stop signs have more dire consequences than others, but the principle remains) seems pretty simple to me but i don’t know, do i? 🙂

  24. Does He forgive us when we are not repentent with what Paul calls, agodly sorrow?

  25. Does He forgive us when we are not repentent with what Paul calls, agodly sorrow? What is the evidence that is manifested as a result of godly sorrow for having sinned?

  26. Em says:

    there are two issues in question IMV one is the issue of sin as a *barrier* between man and God (not individual transgressions which are manifestations of the fact of sin) – the *barrier* came down when God’s only begotten Son paid the price of ALL sins for all time

    the other issue is each man’s relationship with his Creator – i don’t believe we can receive the gift of redemption without repentance and after that?

    we still sin, we need to confess as much as we can – but the forgiveness of each transgression that a redeemed soul commits is not dependent on how deeply sorry we are (hard to imagine no sorrow at all), rather an honest confession and a plea: “God be merciful to me for i am a sinner and i have sinned (again)” and then get up and get on with living… it is the devil who wants you to dwell on your sins and how you “feel” about them – or so it seems to me

    God keep all close and comforted

  27. Jean says:

    Goose,

    You’ve asked some very good questions in comments 16 and 17. Let me take a stab at addressing your major concerns:

    “Therefore, if one believes that the law has been abolished then one also must believe that there is not sin anymore. For if there is no law, then there is no sin.”

    First, let me clarify if necessary, that I never said or meant that the law has been abolished. What the Bible consistently and clearly teaches is that:

    “Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.”

    “Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ”.

    “But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive”

    So, what I want to reiterate is that the new covenant is not ruled by law, but by the Gospel, specifically love and peace. The kingdom of God, which is spiritual until Christ returns, is ruled entirely by the Gospel, specifically love and peace.

    You then asked or rather concluded that “if there is no law, then there is no sin”. Yes, absolutely, that is correct. The new man in Christ does not sin, and in the kingdom of God there is no sin.

    So what about the prophets?

    “I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the Lord.”

    “And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules.”

    What amazing promises! But here’s the thing, these are not Law in the sense of commands as we typically think of the Law. In the kingdom of God, this is Gospel. In other words, in the kingdom of God, He has promised to give us new hearts that carry out the Law willingly without coercion. It’s not “do this, and don’t do that.” It’s “my children will love Me and will love each other perfectly. Murder, stealing, adultery, bearing false witness, dishonoring mother and father, covetousness, and all other iniquity shall be no more.”

    However, we are caught between overlapping ages. Because “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable”, Christians live spiritually in the kingdom of God, while physically in the present age which is passing away. We have new life in the age to come, citizenship in Christ’s kingdom, where the thief can’t steal and neither rust nor mold destroy.

    But we who are living before Christ’s return also continue to live in this present evil age. Paul describes this duel citizenship: “But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness.” The Christian is simultaneously dead and alive; or put another way, simultaneously saint and sinner.

    So, the Law, which has not been abolished, continues to serve its functions in the present age only: to curb evil in civil society and to show men their sin, preparing them for the Gospel. Even the Christian, who bears the image of his/her ancestors Adam/Eve, continues to need the Law, because the flesh is weak. The flesh (or old Adam/Eve) does not respond to the Gospel, only to the Law, and must be subdued. Why, though is very important. We don’t strive to subdue the flesh to earn God’s approval or prove our faith, but for the sake of our neighbors.

    Paul goes so far as to say: “For the commandments … are summed up in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Our neighbors are precisely who our good works are for, not God. God is the giver of gifts, not a receiver. Therefore, we, Christians, continue to hear the law, to discipline and restrain our flesh, so that, here in this age, we might love our neighbors as ourselves.

  28. Em says:

    #27 – good teaching … IMNSHO 🙂

  29. We need to go back to the point I was trying to make at #13 and to bring this back to the text at hand is why was there a NEED for a new priesthood and High Priest in the first place? The law, the priesthood, the sacrificial system all seemed to work fine for 1,500 yrs – heck we barely get 200 yrs in and everyone wants to shred our Constitution.

    So why did we need a NEW covenant and a new priesthood if nothing was changing?

  30. Jean says:

    “So why did we need a NEW covenant and a new priesthood if nothing was changing?”

    …because by the Old covenant NO ONE is made righteousness. The Old Covenant priests can not mediate reconciliation with God, if they themselves are unreconciled.

    What is required is death and resurrection, not renovation. As it is written:

    “For the love of Christ controls us, since we have concluded this, that Christ died for all; therefore all have died. And he died for all so that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised.”
    2 Corinthians 5:14-15 NET

  31. Josh the Baptist says:

    The Old Covenant’s entire purpose was to give birth to the New Covenant. That was the plan from the beginning.

  32. Jean says:

    The OT system does not deal with original sin. The old Adam must be put to death.

  33. Josh the Baptist says:

    Now, Mld’s caveat was “if nothing was changing”. That’s the kicker. Everything was changing.

  34. Jean says:

    Yes, Josh, things changed, but “in accordance with the Scriptures”. Neither Jesus nor the early Christians just invented the NT. The NT and the Messiah were prophesied in the OT.

    I think we’re on the same page, but I wanted to point that out for the readers.

  35. If everything is changing, which is my point, that this is a game changer, why do people want to keep Christians under the law? Why can’t it be accepted that the law has been fulfilled?

    I need someone to step up and explain what they think it means that the law has been fulfilled? as it seems no one is buying my baseball free agents definition of their contracts have been fulfilled, therefore they are no longer bound by what was binding them.

    Again, this is a game changer and has nothing in common with what preceeded it. This is not a variation of the old.

  36. Josh the Baptist says:

    The same reason Israel wanted a King.

  37. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Josh, I agree. I think that the comments by Uriah and Goose are just that – the people calling for a king.

    The point of the text is that their is nothing in common between the Levitical priesthood and the new priesthood of Jesus

  38. Josh the Baptist says:

    Right. The old was just a picture of what was to come.

  39. Jean says:

    The OT legal system is described as a “guardian.”

    “Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” Galatians 3:23-27 ESV

  40. Em says:

    perhaps 1Tim 1:5-10 also adds some light to the place of the law…

    to say that Christ fulfilled the law … hmmm, He, as a man, met the requirements to remove the law’s condemnation of man… sin is still sin, but we can claim our debt as paid in full by Christ and that is not the same as denying that we have a debt – we don’t exactly “declare bankruptcy protection” hmmm … or do we?

  41. Jean @ 27 and next comment that was posted by you, agree in all that you shared.

    Jesus summed up the laws, yet also told us to heed the 10 commandments.

    We choose to sin. To say otherwise would then mean that we are in error of holding anyone to an account.

    MLD seems to insist upon flipping what has been shared into a work salvation base issue which no one including me have ever put forth. This leaves with the impression that he believes that to sin is something that cannot be eradicated from his life and that he has no control or choice in the matter.

  42. Em says:

    [MLD]”leaves with the impression that he believes that to sin is something that cannot be eradicated from his life and that he has no control or choice in the matter.”

    i must – FWIW – agree with MLD (or at least i think i do) because our flesh is flesh and therefore corrupted, thus sin will never be eradicated totally from one’s life on this mortal plain

    but like the stop sign – our traffic laws – some of us are way better drivers than others of us are – hopefully, most Christians fit this end of the spectrum, too… some are too cautious barely clearing the intersection and others confident of their skills make those “California stops” frequently with no consequences and then there are the lawless ones who fill up the wrecking yard with evidence of their skills

  43. I have King. He is also my Tedeemer,y Salvation, Lord, Master, Protector, in Strong Refuge, Friend, and Brother. His name is Jesus. He is the promise Messiah. And so much more.

  44. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Uriah, if I were to quit sinning, which I am not capable of doing, I would no longer need Jesus – and I would never want to be put in that situation.

    Now, let’s pony up a little – how has your life been since you stopped sinning? If you have not stopped sinning, why do you keep purposely choosing to sin and then how are you different from me?

  45. Eradicated usage was not meant to mean that we while in this fleshly body that we would never sin, but rather that if we do truly repent, them that sin is no longer practice habitually nor is it acted out upon or against another.

  46. Jean says:

    [MLD]”leaves with the impression that he believes that to sin is something that cannot be eradicated from his life and that he has no control or choice in the matter.”

    If you studied the Bible as long and intensively as MLD has, and went to a church that teaches the very high standard of God’s Law, “so that every mouth may be stopped” (Rom 3:19) and thus the Gospel may come in and do its work, then you would realize, along with MLD, that as long as we are in the flesh of our parents Adam and Eve, we have no hope to eradicate sin from our life. We can either pretend or despair, but we certainly can’t do it.

    On the other hand, MLD has never said that he has no control or choice in his behavior.

  47. Jean says:

    Em,

    Your 1 Tim 4 citation at comment 40 is a very good addition to the conversation.

  48. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Jean, I have quit doing many, many sins. If I were to guess, I either got tired or bored doing them. 😉

  49. Jean says:

    One of the sad, but true, realities, is that most of us probably know atheists, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Mormons, JW, Hindi, etc., who sin a lot less than many of our Christian friends and perhaps ourselves.

  50. Steve Wright says:

    I have quit doing many, many sins. If I were to guess, I either got tired or bored doing them
    ——————————————————————
    Serious question. Do you give Jesus any glory for any of the sins you have quit doing? Any credit at all?

    (As an aside, I know of quite a few old guys who are has terrible as any teenager out there. Not sure age or boredom is that powerful….But Jesus is.)

  51. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Steve, you probably missed the smiley 🙂 🙂 🙂

    It’s my way of telling people to buzz off or get off the guilt train

    Who you calling old????

  52. Steve,
    I have always had trouble with the teaching you propose in your #50 (well at least for the past 10 years).

    I teach when a person is saved, they are removed from the eternal consequences of their sin – even the sin I commit these 35 years later.

    Your teaching seems to be that Jesus will take away your sinful behavior, even the desire for that sin and behavior. You have stated such about your own life. Here is my problem – what of those who have come to faith and still struggle with there sin? Where was Jesus? Better yet, what of the person who has given up the sin, drinking, drugs, messing around because Jesus ‘took it from them’ and then 10 yrs later fall back into it – where was Jesus?

  53. Actually, I want to step that last comment back a little. I don’t want it to be about Steve, but about what harm I think that position does.

    I was taught to give my sin to Jesus, and I have many times – because in the interim, I take it back from him. So what is my status? Have I given up the faith? Have I ‘backslid’? Are my prayers for deliverance unheard?

    To me this teaching then turns everything back on to me, my will, my behavior etc – not why I need a savior (even after salvation) and not on what he does for me daily before the throne of God.

  54. Goose says:

    Uriah,

    You are more than welcome to use anything I have posted that you find valuable.

  55. Goose says:

    God’s law is still God’s law. Sin is still sin. Messiah’s death and resurrection did not structurally change either.

    Post-resurrection, sin is biblically defined as the transgression of God’s law. Sin occurs post-resurrection just as it occurred pre-resurrection.

    The law itself has not changed post-resurrection. The law itself has not been abolished post-resurrection.

    If you transgress the law post-resurrection you have sinned (even as a believer), just as those who transgressed God’s law pre-resurrection sinned.

    Even post-resurrection, idolatry is still idolatry, adultery is still adultery, unclean foods are still unclean, etc.

    To assess sin in one’s life, post-resurrection, can only be done by comparing one’s actions/behaviors/thoughts against God’s law.

    Will we ever be perfect this side of eternity? Of course not.

    Are we saved by obedience to God’s law? Of course not.

    However, to honor the Messiah, shouldn’t we strive to live sin free and holy lives by obeying His law? Absolutely!

    So then, what has changed post-resurrection?

    Messiah’s death on the cross and subsequent resurrection has paid the penalty due those who sin against God, provided that one puts his/her faith in the Messiah. So, the penalty for transgressing God’s law is what is now different post-resurrection; the penalty has been transferred to the Messiah, instead of you and me.

    Messiah’s death and resurrection obviously has not abolished God’s law but the penalty for transgressing God’s law has now been paid by the Messiah, for those who believe in the Messiah!

    That is what has changed post-resurrection!

    The author of Hebrews is not suggesting a wholesale abolishment of God’s law. Rather, the portion of the law that has been altered and/or changed, relates to just the priesthood and the High Priest.

  56. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    Goose,
    “Will we ever be perfect this side of eternity? Of course not.” Why not? I thought God made us a new creation – did he leave a flaw in us? I always hear that God would not command us to do anything that he has not enabled us to complete.

    You still fail to address what it means that Jesus came and fulfilled the law? It must mean something other than, well… I don’t know – did nothing change?

    You keep using the word abolished, which I find humorous since that is exactly what Jesus said he did not come to do. But he did say exactly what he came to do — and you refuse to address that. Again, think back to a contract. When you paid off that great 1966 Pontiac 🙂 what obligation did you have to that lender after you “fulfilled” that contract?

  57. Jean says:

    “However, to honor the Messiah, shouldn’t we strive to live sin free and holy lives by obeying His law? Absolutely!”

    Actually, I haven’t been able to find your teaching, Goose, anywhere in the NT. But, there was a rich young man who tried to do what you’re teaching. He called Jesus “Good Teacher” and even assured Jesus that from this young man’s youth he kept all the commandments. That’s a lot of honor, right? St. Mark reports that Jesus “loved him”, so there appears to be no B.S. here.

    Yet he had his heart in the wrong place, so Jesus upped the ante: “You lack one thing: go, sell all that you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” I don’t think anyone is going to honor God by so-called holy living and obeying His law.

    If you want to know what honoring God looks like, may I refer you to Matthew 25:34-40. Or, better yet: “Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.” There you have sanctification. Can these be accomplished by your striving, or is this a work of the Holy Spirit?

  58. Martin Luther's Disciple says:

    I want to be Jean when I row up.

  59. Goose says:

    MLD @ 56….

    As you are well aware, “fulfill” has been given many possible meanings by many commentators and scholars alike. If memory serves, BDAG lists it most generally as “to make full, fill (full)”. Other ideas espoused to make sense of “fulfill” include, but are not limited to, establish, validate, confirm, complete, or to embody in living form, etc.

    Most simply, Messiah as the Word of God, made manifest in the flesh, came to “fulfill” the Torah/God’s law for humanity by embodying it to its fullest extent in His teachings, actions, and deeds.

    “Fulfill” surely did not change God’s law, “fulfill” surely did not abolish God’s law, “fulfill” surely did not render men sinless, “fulfill” surely did not free men from God’s desire that they obey Him, “fulfill” surely does not mean that we are now free to act/behave in any manner we wish, without regard for God’s law.

  60. Goose says:

    Jean @ 57 stated…

    “Actually, I haven’t been able to find your teaching, Goose, anywhere in the NT.”

    “I don’t think anyone is going to honor God by so-called holy living and obeying His law.”

    Respectfully, Jean, I think you are once again over-committing.

    My teaching, as you put it, is rather simple and Biblical…. God hates sin, sin is defined as the transgression of God’s law by our Bible, therefore we need to come to an understanding of God’s law so that we can look to keep from sin.

    This should be how all followers of Messiah look to conduct their lives, even in light of the fact that the penalty for our sins has been paid by the Messiah through His death and resurrection. We are not to be obedient to be saved, but we are to be obedient because we are saved and we are His people.

    One can’t read the totality of Scripture and conclude that sin is acceptable in the eyes of God. I hope you teach that sin is not acceptable to God, Jean.

    The totality of Scripture also concludes that obedience is commanded by God.
    I hope you teach that obedience is commanded by God, Jean.

  61. Em says:

    i think i understand the contract example – for me it is clearer to think of it in terms of debt payment – one we could not pay, so God stepped in and paid the price, Himself… to whom was the payment made? … i wonder…

    reading the conversation, tho, the word that kept bouncing around in my mind was “tolerate” – no, i don’t have a list of scripture references, but what the redeemed must do is not tolerate sin, we cannot conclude that we can’t help it, so why try to curb it?

    and yet i don’t believe we should dwell on sin either, i.e., be watchful, confess and move on

    hopefully one grows in discernment in order to know when to confront and when to overlook for a time – interesting how the KJ uses the word “suffer” – not quite as we use it today, but applicable, eh?

  62. Goose, so your position is that in fulfilling God’s law nothing has changed? God still reigns in his kingdom through his law? Let me just say we do differ – your position is that of American evangelicalism.

    So that we don’t need to continue on, I will just clearly point out that the difference is that Jean’s position along with mine is that God today rules through the gospel.

    As to sin, I have not advocated for the abolishing of sin or the fact that we sin any less. In fact if that is the benchmark I will bring back up that our position is that we are still 100% sinners and that each of us has made no progress on the ‘sin’ scale. I am not sinless and I do not sin any less.

    I will venture out on a limb that you are one who thinks that you are capable of sinning less and that you have made improvement over the years. Perhaps at one time you were 50% sinner and 50% good but after these many years of being in God’s word and going to church, well, You have gotten better. Perhaps you are now only 25% sinner but have raised yourself to 75% good, while recognizing that you can never get to 100% no sin, you can keep climbing that ladder.

    This brings us to the point. I don’t know you so I will use broad generalities. You think the law is there to show us how to live – you know, the rules. What is it evangelicals call the BIBLE? Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth? 🙂

  63. Jean says:

    Last night I was over at the local non-denom mega-church participating with a group of about 45 adults in a Bible Study of Romans. The pastor was teaching on Ch. 7 and threw out this question to the group: How do you deal with the struggle against sin in your life?

    There was a pause of silence in the room, and then two sincere people offered this advice:
    1) God hates sin. If you keep this in mind, you will sin less.
    2) The more you love God, the less you’ll sin.

    Imagine for a moment how that advice would impact you. How does it make you feel about yourself and God? Does it make you more or less honest with yourself and others? Is this Biblical? Does it work?

    Let’s return to the Parable of the Good Samaritan for a moment. After the Samaritan patched up the helpless half-dead man he checked him into an inn and gave the innkeeper a blank check to care for the man until the Samaritan returned. A blank check. The Samaritan didn’t give the innkeeper $75 for the room and another $50 for meals. He gave him a blank check and said “Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back”.

    When we read this Parable, we can read it from the perspective of the Lawyer who was looking for a law answer. Who is my neighbor? When we do it that way, how do you measure up? Who writes a blank check to his enemy?

    Or we can read it this way, as Gospel: That was me in the ditch, half dead. Jesus, my enemy (not his) found me helpless and purchased me for eternity with the infinite price of his body and blood on the cross. He checked me into his body (the church) and has promised to come back for me. Jesus is the Good Samaritan, the neighbor who loves us perfectly.

    A law reading may be just what at times we need to remind us of just how far short of God’s standards we all are. But, if the preacher is competent, he will not leave us with our guilt and shame, but will give us the Gospel reading. The Gospel is life giving. We should live in and by the Gospel.

    Paul wrote that “[f]or those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son”. Again this is a promise; it’s Gospel, not law. We don’t do the conforming. In fact, if we try to do the conforming, we fall into legalism and away from the Gospel and Christ. Part of faith is trusting God to form us into whatever he desires for us, which will be better than anything we could possibly do on our own.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.