← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Texas Dissident

Preaching Christ Alone

Thread ID: 16775 | Posts: 17 | Started: 2005-02-15

Texas Dissident [OP]

2005-02-15 18:21 | User Profile

[url=http://www.modernreformation.org/mh93preaching.htm]Preaching Christ Alone[/url]

If our preaching does not center on Christ, from Genesis to Revelation, no matter how good or helpful, it is not the proclamation of God's Word.

by Michael Horton

"You search the Scriptures in vain, thinking that you have eternal life in them, not realizing that it is they which testify concerning me." With these words, our Lord confronted what has always been the temptation in our reading of Holy Scripture: to read it without Christ as the supreme focus of revelation.

Many people who come to embrace the specific tenets of the Protestant Reformation (grace alone, scripture alone, Christ alone, to God alone be glory, faith alone, etc.) are liberated by the good news of God's free grace in Christ. Pastors who used to preach a human-centered message suddenly become impassionate defenders of God's glory and particular doctrines which often characterized the messages and shaped the teaching ministry of the congregation are exchanged for more biblical truths. This is all very exciting, of course, and we should be grateful to God for awakening us (this writer included) to the doctrines of grace. Nevertheless, there are deeper issues involved.

Not infrequently, we run into a church that is very excited about having just discovered the Reformation faith, but the preaching remains what it always was: witty, perhaps anecdotal (plenty of stories and illustrations that often serve the purpose of entertainment rather than illumination of a point), and moralistic (Bible characters surveyed for their usefulness in teaching moral lessons for our daily life). This is because we have not yet integrated our systematic theology with our hermeneutics (i.e., way of interpreting Scripture). We say, "Christ alone!" in our doctrine of salvation, but in actual practice our devotional life is saturated with sappy and trivial "principles" and the preaching is often directed toward motivating us through practical tips.

What we intend to do in this issue is present an urgent call to recover the lost art of Reformational preaching. This isn't just a matter of concern for preachers themselves, for the ministry of the Word is something that is committed to every believer, since we are all witnesses to God's unfolding revelation in Christ. It is not only important for those who speak for God in the pulpit in public assemblies, but for the layperson who reads his or her Bible and wonders, "How can I make sense of it all?" Below, I want to point out why we think there has been a decline of evangelical preaching in this important area.

[u]Moralism[/u]

I have already referred to this threat and it will be the target of a good deal of criticism throughout this issue. Whenever the story of David and Goliath is used to motivate you to think about the "Goliaths" in your life and the "Seven Stones of Victory" used to defeat them, you have been the victim of moralistic preaching. The same is true whenever the primary intention of the sermon is to give you a Bible hero to emulate or a villain to teach a lesson, like "crime doesn't pay," or, "sin doesn't really make you happy." Reading or hearing the Bible in this way turns the Scriptures into a sort of Aesop's Fables or Grimm's Fairy Tales, where the story exists for the purpose of teaching a lesson to the wise and the story ends with, "and they lived happily ever after." In his Screwtape Letters, Lewis has Screwtape writing Wormwood in the attempt to persuade Wormwood to undermine the faith by turning Jesus into a great hero and moralist.

He has to be a 'great man' in the modern sense of the word--one standing at the terminus of some centrifugal and unbalanced line of thought--a crank vending a panacea. We thus distract men's minds from Who He is, and what He did. We first make Him solely a teacher, and then conceal the very substantial agreement between His teaching and those of other great moral teachers.

This is the greatest problem, from my own experience, with the preaching we hear today. There is such a demand to be practical--that is, to have clever principles for daily living. But the danger, of course, is that what one hears on Sunday morning is not the Word of God. To be sure, the Scriptures were read (maybe) and there was a sermon (perhaps), but the message had more in common with a talk at the Lion's Club, a pop-psychology seminar, prophecy conference or political convention than with proclamation of heavenly truth "from above."

Because we are already seated with Christ in the heavens (Eph.2:4) and are already participating in the new creation that dawned with Christ's resurrection, we are to be heavenly-minded. This, of course, does not mean that we are irrelevant mystics who have no use for this world; rather, it means that we are oriented in our outlook toward God rather than humanity (including ourselves), the eternal rather than this present age, holiness rather than happiness, glorifying God rather than demanding that God meet our "felt needs." Only with this kind of orientation can we be of use to this world as "salt" and "light," bearing a distinctive testimony to the transcendent in a world that is so bound to the present moment.

Finally, moralism commits a basic hermeneutical error, from the Reformation point of view. Both Lutherans and the Reformed have insisted, in the words of the Second Helvetic Confession, "The Gospel is, indeed, opposed to the law. For the law works wrath and announces a curse, whereas the Gospel preaches grace and blessing." Calvin and his successor, Beza, followed the common Lutheran understanding that while both the law and the Gospel were clearly taught in Scripture (in both Old and New Testaments), that the confusion of the two categories lay at the heart of all wayward preaching and teaching in the church. It is not that the Old Testament believers were under the law and we are under grace or the Gospel, but rather that believers in both Testaments are obligated to the moral law, to perfectly obey its precepts and conform to its purity not only in outward deed, but in the frame and fashion of heart and soul. And yet, in both Testaments, believers are offered the Gospel of Christ's righteousness placed over the naked, law-breaking sinner so that God can accept the wicked--yes, even the wicked for the sake of Christ.

Both Lutherans and the Reformed have also affirmed that the law still has a place after conversion in the life of the believer, as the only commands for works that are now done in faith. Nevertheless, preaching must observe clearly the distinction between these two things. As John Murray writes, "The law can never give the believer any spiritual power to obey its commands." And yet, so much of the moralistic preaching we get these days presupposes the error that somehow principles, steps for victory, rules, guidelines that the preacher has cleverly devised (i.e., the traditions of men?) promise spiritual success to those who will simply put them into daily practice. Those who are new in the faith regard this kind of preaching as useful and practical; those who have been around it for a while eventually burn out and grow cynical about the Christian life because they cannot "gain victory" even though they have tried everything in the book.

It must be said that not even the commands of God himself can give us life or the power to grow as Christians. The statutes are right and good, but I am not, Paul said in Romans 7. Even the believer cannot gain any strength from the law. The law can only tell him what is right; the Gospel alone can make him right by giving him what he cannot gain by law-keeping. If the law itself is rendered powerless by human sinfulness, how on earth could we possibly believe that humanly devised schemes and principles for victory and spiritual power could achieve success? We look to the law for the standard, realizing that even as Christians we fall far short of reaching it. Just then, the Gospel steps in and tells us that someone has attained that standard, that victory, for us, in our place, and now the law can be preached again without tormenting our conscience. It cannot provoke us to fear or anxiety, since its demands are fulfilled by someone else's obedience.

Therefore, it is our duty to preach "the whole counsel of God," which includes everything in the category of law (the divine commandments and threats of punishment; the call to repentance and conversion, sanctification and service to God and our neighbor) and in the category of Gospel (God's promise of rest, from Genesis to Revelation; its fulfillment in Christ's death, burial and resurrection, ascension, intercession, second coming; the gift of faith, through which the believer is justified and entered into a vital union with Christ; the gift of persevering faith, which enables us to pursue godliness in spite of suffering). But any type of preaching that fails to underscore the role of the law in condemning the sinner and the role of the Gospel in justifying the sinner or confuses these two is a serious violation of the distinction which Paul himself makes in Galatians 3:15-25.

Much of the evangelical preaching with which I am familiar neither inspires a terror of God's righteousness nor praise for the depths of God's grace in his gift of righteousness. Rather, it is often a confusion of these two, so that the bad news isn't quite that bad and the good news isn't all that good. We actually can do something to get closer to God; we aren't so far from God that we cannot make use of the examples of the biblical characters and attain righteousness by following the "Seven Steps to the Spirit-Filled Life." But in the biblical view, the biblical characters are not examples of their victory, but of God's! The life of David is not a testimony to David's faithfulness, surely, but to God's and for us to read any part of that story as though we could attain the Gospel (righteousness) by the law (obedience) is the age-old error of Cain, the Pharisees, the Galatian Judaizers, the Pelagians, Semi-Pelagians, Arminians, and Higher Life proponents.

There are varieties of moralism. Some moralists are sentimental in their preaching. In other words, the goal is to be helpful and a loving nurturer who aims each Sunday at affirming his congregation with the wise sayings of a Jesus who sounds a lot like a talk-show therapist. Other moralists are harsh in their preaching. Their Gospel is, "Do this and you shall live." In other words, unless you can measure a growth in holiness by any number of indicators or barometers, you should not conclude that you are entitled to the promises. The Gospel, for these preachers, is law and the law is Gospel. One can attain God's forgiveness and acceptance only through constant self-assessment. Doubt rather than assurance marks mature Christian reflection, these preachers insist, in sharp distinction to the tenderness of the Savior who excluded only those who thought they had jumped through all the right hoops. The sinners were welcome at Christ's table, the "righteous" were clearly not.

Therefore, even the Christian needs to be constantly reminded that his sanctification is so slow and imperfect in this life that not one single spiritual blessing can be pried from God's hand by obedience; it is all there in the Father's open, outstretched hand. This, of course, is the death-knell to moralism of every stripe. The bad news is very bad indeed; the good news is greater than any earthly moral wisdom. That's why Paul said, paraphrased, "You Greek Christians in Corinth want moral wisdom? OK, I'll give you wisdom: Christ is made our righteousness, holiness, and redemption. Aha! God in his foolishness is wiser than all the world's self-help gurus!" (1 Cor. 1:18-31).

Moralism might answer the "felt needs" of those who demand practical and inspirational pep talks on Sunday morning, but it cannot really be considered preaching.

[u]Verse-By-Verse Exposition[/u]

Having been raised in churches which painstakingly exegeted a particular passage verse-by-verse, I have profited from the insights this method sometimes offers. Nevertheless, it too falls short of an adequate way of preaching, reading, or interpreting the sacred text.

First, an explanation of how this is done. I remember the pastor going through even rather brief books like Jude over a period of several months and there we would be, pen and paper in hand as though we were in a classroom, following his outline--either printed in the bulletin or on an overhead projector. Words would be taken apart like an auto mechanic taking apart an engine, conducting an extensive study on the root of that word in the Greek language. This is inadvisable, first, because word studies often focus on etymology (i.e., what is the root of the work in the original language?) rather than on the use of the word in ancient literature, for very often the use of a particular word in ancient literature had nothing at all to do with the root meaning of the word itself. It is dangerous to think of biblical words as magical or different somehow from the same words in the secular works of their day.

This approach is also dangerous because it "misses the forest for the trees." In other words, revelation is one long, unfolding drama of redemption and to get wrapped up in a technical analysis of bits and pieces fails to do justice to the larger context of the text. What God intended as one continuous story that is proclaimed each week to remind the faithful of God's promise and our calling is often turned into an arduous and irrelevant search for words. The same tendency is present in Bible study methods or study Bibles that outline, take apart, and put back together the pieces of the Bible in such a way as to get in the way of the Scripture's inherent power and authority.

Another fault of this verse-by-verse method is that it often fails to appreciate the variety of genre in the biblical text and imposes a woodenly literalistic grid on passages that are meant to be preached, read, or interpreted in a different way. The Bible is not a textbook of geometry that can be reductionistically dissected for simple conclusions, but a book in which God himself speaks to us, disclosing his nature, his purpose, and his unfolding plan of redemption through history.

A final danger of this method is that it tends to remove the congregation from the text of Scripture. Even though the hearers may be very involved taking notes, it only serves to reinforce in their experience that they could not simply sit down and read their English Bibles for themselves and discover the deeper meaning of the text apart from those who have the method down and know the original languages.

[u]Carelessness[/u]

Unfortunately, too much of the preaching we come across these days does not even have the merit of attempting a faithful exposition of the Scriptures, as these preceding methods do.

When John Calvin was asked to respond to Cardinal Sadoleto as to why Geneva was irretrievably Protestant, the Reformer included this indictment of the state of preaching before the Reformation:

Nay, what one sermon was there from which old wives might not carry off more whimsies than they could devise at their own fireside in a month? For as sermons were usually then divided, the first half was devoted to those misty questions of the schools which might astonish the rude populace, while the second contained sweet stories and amusing speculations by which the hearers might be kept awake. Only a few expressions were thrown in from the Word of God, that by their majesty they might procure credit for these frivolities.

Calvin then contrasts this former way of preaching with the Reformation approach to Scripture:

First, we bid a man to begin by examining himself, and this not in a superficial and perfunctory manner, but to cite his conscience before the tribunal of God, and when sufficiently convinced of his iniquity, to reflect on the strictness of the sentence pronounced on all sinners. Thus confounded and amazed at his misery, he is prostrated and humbled before God; and, casting away all self-confidence, groans as if given up to final perdition. Then we show that the only haven of safety is in the mercy of God, as manifested in Christ, in whom every part of our salvation is complete. As all mankind are, in the sight of God, lost sinners, we hold that Christ is their only righteousness, since, by His obedience, He has wiped off our transgressions; by His sacrifice, appeased the divine anger.

The Genevan Reformer goes on to ask the Cardinal what problem he has with that. It is probably, says Calvin, that the Reformation way of preaching is not "practical" enough; that it doesn't give people clear directions for daily living and motivate them to a higher life. Nevertheless, the Reformers all believed that the preacher is required to preach the text, not to decide on a topic and look for a text that can be pressed into its service. And the text, said they, was aimed not at offering heroes to emulate (even Jesus), but at proclamation of God's redemptive act in the person and work of the God-Man.

Who couldn't find in Calvin's description of medieval preaching something of the contemporary situation? In many of the church growth contexts, once more the sermon is not given the central place liturgically and the sermon itself often reveals that the speaker is more widely read in marketing surveys, trend analyses, biographies of the rich and famous, "One Hundred & One Sermon Illustrations," and Leadership journal than in the Greek New Testament, hermeneutical aids, and the riches of centuries of theological scholarship. One can often tell when a pastor has just read a powerful book of pop-psychology, Christian personality theories, end-times speculations, moral or political calls to action, or entrepreneurial successes. He has been blown away by some of the insights and has scouted about for a text that can, if read very quickly, lend some divine credibility to something he did not actually get from that text, but from the Christian or secular best-seller's list. "I'm a pastor, not a theologian," they say, in contrast to the classical evangelical notion, inherited from the Reformation, that a pastor was a scholar as well as a preacher.

Good communicators can get away with the lack of content by their witty, anecdotal style, but they are still unfaithful as ministers of the Word, even if they help people and keep folks coming back for more.

[u]The "Christ And..." Syndrome[/u]

In C. S. Lewis's Screwtape Letters, the devil's strategy is not to remove Christ altogether from the scene, but to propagate a "Christ And..." religion:

Today, we see this in terms of Christ and America; Christ and Self-Esteem; Christ and Prosperity; Christ and the Republican or Democratic Party; Christ and End-Time Predictions; Christ and Healing; Christ and Marketing and Church Growth; Christ and Traditional Values, and on we could go, until Christ himself becomes little more than an appendage to a religion that can, after all, get on quite well without him. That is not, of course, to say that the evangelical enterprise could do this without some difficulty. After all, every movement needs a mascot. We say we are Christ-centered, but what was the sermon about last Sunday?

In fact, it is not even enough to preach the centrality of Christ. It is particularly Christ as he is our sacrifice for sin and guarantor of new life because of his resurrection that the Bible makes central in its revelation.

After a tragic car accident, Fr. James Feehan, a seasoned Roman Catholic priest in New Zealand, realized afresh the significance of Paul's command to preach Christ and him crucified:

If the pulpit is not committed to this utter centrality of the Cross, then our preaching, however, brilliant, is doomed to sterility and failure. We preach the Christ of the Mount; we preach the Christ of the healing ministry; we preach the Christ of the sublime example; we preach the Christ of the Social Gospel; we preach the Christ of the Resurrection but rarely, if ever, do we preach the Christ of the Cross. We have evaded the very heart of the Christian message. In our preaching we tend to decry the human predicament, the turmoil of our lives, the evil in the world, and we wonder if there is a way out. The Way Out is staring us in the face. It is the Way of Christ, the Way of the Cross (Preaching Christ Crucified: Our Guilty Silence [Dublin: The Mercier Press, 1991], p.19).

In other words, to guard the centrality of Christ in our preaching, it is necessary to guard the centrality of Christ's ministry as prophet, priest and king. Otherwise, we will even use "Christ" as a means of preaching something other than Christ. We will insist that we are preaching Christ even though we are really only using his name in vain as a buttress for some fashionable tangent we happen to be on this week.

What then is the proper method for reading, preaching, and interpreting God's Word? Many resist the idea that there is a proper method at all, dismissing it as naive. The content is normative and unchanging, they say, but the method is relative and depends on what works best for each pastor. It is often treated as a matter of style, like whether one wears robes or has the choir in the front or the back of the church. But not only does the Bible give us the content of what we are to believe; it gives us a method for properly determining that message.

Quantrill

2005-02-15 18:42 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident] [u]The "Christ And..." Syndrome[/u]

In C. S. Lewis's Screwtape Letters, the devil's strategy is not to remove Christ altogether from the scene, but to propagate a "Christ And..." religion:

What we want, if men become Christians at all, is to keep them in the state of "Christianity And." You know--Christianity and the Crisis, Christianity and the New Psychology, Christianity and the New Order, Christianity and Faith Healing, Christianity and Psychic Research, Christianity and Vegetarianism, Christianity and Spelling Reform. If they must be Christians, let them at least be Christians with a difference. Substitute for the faith itself some Fashion with a Christian colouring. Work on their horror of the Same Old Thing (Letter XXV).[/QUOTE] This is one of Lewis's best insights, in my opinion, and it leads to a further danger -- that of confusing causes and results. For example, people often support 'helping the poor' because of the demands of Christianity, which is perfectly admirable. In our modern age, however, they often end up supporting Christianity because it is useful for 'helping the poor'. This cart-before-the-horse mentality is absolutely rampant in our churches today, with Christ always being considered useful insofar as He advances some temporal cause (though the causes themselves may very well be praiseworthy.)

Jack Cassidy

2005-02-16 02:55 | User Profile

Since reading Paul Gottfried's piece in this week's The American Conservative I've been wondering if Protestantism's goal was not simply to replace Christ with the Old Law.

Isn't it ironic that the Christian Zionist Evangelicals view support for Israel as being support for Jews, while those Jews who take their faith seriously point out that Zionism is antithetical to true Jewish faith in the Torah (see [url="http://www.nkusa.org"]http://www.nkusa.org[/url]).

Angler

2005-02-16 07:04 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Jack Cassidy]Since reading Paul Gottfried's piece in this week's The American Conservative I've been wondering if Protestantism's goal was not simply to replace Christ with the Old Law. It's certainly not all Protestants. Some are rabidly Zionist, and that might even be true of most evangelicals (I don't know the stats), but then you have the more mainstream Protestants, such as the Presbyterians. Their recent decision to divest from Israel really caused a stir among the Jews.

Isn't it ironic that the Christian Zionist Evangelicals view support for Israel as being support for Jews, while those Jews who take their faith seriously point out that Zionism is antithetical to true Jewish faith in the Torah (see [url="http://www.nkusa.org"]http://www.nkusa.org[/url]).[/QUOTE]Very ironic. I've pointed this out to Christian Zionist posters on other boards, saying, "If you're going to support the Jews, why not support those who try to put God first rather than their own selfish and ruthless nationalism?" I was banned, of course. :lol:

Jack Cassidy

2005-02-16 07:32 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Angler]It's certainly not all Protestants. Some are rabidly Zionist, and that might even be true of most evangelicals (I don't know the stats), but then you have the more mainstream Protestants, such as the Presbyterians. Their recent decision to divest from Israel really caused a stir among the Jews. [/QUOTE] These social gospel Protestants are not the folks I'm referring to. Parts of Gottfried's article in this week's TAC ("Losing their Religion: Neoconservatives lay claim to the Puritans") kind of made me realize that Protestantism-- serious Protestantism, Calvinist-Reformed Protestantism-- has always been Jewish ass-kissing.

Texas Dissident

2005-02-16 08:05 | User Profile

Actually, in his [url=http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/luther/gal/web/gal-inx.html]Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians[/url], Luther makes a convincing case that these latter-day protestant judaizers are simply returning to Rome.

VERSE 14. I said unto Peter before them all, If thou being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews.

To live as a Jew is nothing bad. To eat or not to eat pork, what difference does it make? But to play the Jew, and for conscience' sake to abstain from certain meats, is a denial of Christ. When Paul saw that Peter's attitude tended to this, he withstood Peter and said to him: "You know that the observance of the law is not needed unto righteousness. You know that we are justified by faith in Christ. You know that we may eat all kinds of meats. Yet by your example you obligate the Gentiles to forsake Christ, and to return to the Law. You give them reason to think that faith is not sufficient unto salvation."

Peter did not say so, but his example said quite plainly that the observance of the Law must be added to faith in Christ, if men are to be saved. From Peter's example the Gentiles could not help but draw the conclusion that the Law was necessary unto salvation. If this error had been permitted to pass unchallenged, Christ would have lost out altogether.

The controversy involved the preservation of pure doctrine. In such a controversy Paul did not mind if anybody took offense.

VERSE 15. We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles.

"When we Jews compare ourselves with the Gentiles, we look pretty good. We have the Law, we have good works. Our rectitude dates from our birth, because the Jewish religion is natural to us. But all this does not make us righteous before God."

Peter and the others lived up to the requirements of the Law. They had circumcision, the covenant, the promises, the apostleship. But because of these advantages they were not to think themselves righteous before God. None of these prerogatives spell faith in Christ, which alone can justify a person. We do not mean to imply that the Law is bad. We do not condemn the Law, circumcision, etc., for their failure to justify us. Paul spoke disparagingly of these ordinances, because the false apostles asserted that mankind is saved by them without faith. Paul could not let this assertion stand, for without faith all things are deadly.

VERSE 16. Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ.

For the sake of argument let us suppose that you could fulfill the Law in the spirit of the first commandment of God: "Thou shalt love the Lord, thy God, with all thy heart." It would do you no good. A person simply is not justified by the works of the Law.

The works of the Law, according to Paul, include the whole Law, judicial, ceremonial, moral. Now, if the performance of the moral law cannot justify, how can circumcision justify, when circumcision is part of the ceremonial law?

The demands of the Law may be fulfilled before and after justification. There were many excellent men among the pagans of old, men who never heard of justification. They lived moral lives. But that fact did not justify them. Peter, Paul, all Christians, live up to the Law. But that fact does not justify them. "For I know nothing by myself," says Paul, "yet am I not hereby justified." (I Cor. 4:4.)

The nefarious opinion of the papists, which attributes the merit of grace and the remission of sins to works, must here be emphatically rejected. The papists say that a good work performed before grace has been obtained, is able to secure grace for a person, because it is no more than right that God should reward a good deed. When grace has already been obtained, any good work deserves everlasting life as a due payment and reward for merit. For the first, God is no debtor, they say; but because God is good and just, it is no more than right (they say) that He should reward a good work by granting grace for the service. But when grace has already been obtained, they continue, God is in the position of a debtor, and is in duty bound to reward a good work with the gift of eternal life. This is the wicked teaching of the papacy.

Now, if I could perform any work acceptable to God and deserving of grace, and once having obtained grace my good works would continue to earn for me the right and reward of eternal life, why should I stand in need of the grace of God and the suffering and death of Christ? Christ would be of no benefit to me. Christ's mercy would be of no use to me.

This shows how little insight the pope and the whole of his religious coterie have into spiritual matters, and how little they concern themselves with the spiritual health of their forlorn flocks. They cannot believe that the flesh is unable to think, speak, or do anything except against God. If they could see evil rooted in the nature of man, they would never entertain such silly dreams about man's merit or worthiness.

With Paul we absolutely deny the possibility of self merit. God never yet gave to any person grace and everlasting life as a reward for merit. The opinions of the papists are the intellectual pipe-dreams of idle pates, that serve no other purpose but to draw men away from the true worship of God. The papacy is founded upon hallucinations.

The true way of salvation is this. First, a person must realize that he is a sinner, the kind of a sinner who is congenitally unable to do any good thing. "Whatsoever is not of faith, is sin." Those who seek to earn the grace of God by their own efforts are trying to please God with sins. They mock God, and provoke His anger. The first step on the way to salvation is to repent.

The second part is this. God sent His only-begotten Son into the world that we may live through His merit. He was crucified and killed for us. By sacrificing His Son for us God revealed Himself to us as a merciful Father who donates remission of sins, righteousness, and life everlasting for Christ's sake. God hands out His gifts freely unto all men. That is the praise and glory of His mercy.

The scholastics explain the way of salvation in this manner. When a person happens to perform a good deed, God accepts it and as a reward for the good deed God pours charity into that person. They call it "charity infused." This charity is supposed to remain in the heart. They get wild when they are told that this quality of the heart cannot justify a person.

They also claim that we are able to love God by our own natural strength, to love God above all things, at least to the extent that we deserve grace. And, say the scholastics, because God is not satisfied with a literal performance of the Law, but expects us to fulfill the Law according to the mind of the Lawgiver, therefore we must obtain from above a quality above nature, a quality which they call "formal righteousness."

We say, faith apprehends Jesus Christ. Christian faith is not an inactive quality in the heart. If it is true faith it will surely take Christ for its object. Christ, apprehended by faith and dwelling in the heart, constitutes Christian righteousness, for which God gives eternal life.

In contrast to the doting dreams of the scholastics, we teach this: First a person must learn to know himself from the Law. With the prophet he will then confess: "All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." And, "there is none that doeth good, no, not one." And, "against thee, thee only, have I sinned."

Having been humbled by the Law, and having been brought to a right estimate of himself, a man will repent. He finds out that he is so depraved, that no strength, no works, no merits of his own will ever deliver him from his guilt. He will then understand the meaning of Paul's words: "I am sold under sin"; and "they are all under sin."

At this state a person begins to lament: "Who is going to help me?" In due time comes the Word of the Gospel, and says: "Son, thy sins are forgiven thee. Believe in Jesus Christ who was crucified for your sins. Remember, your sins have been imposed upon Christ."

In this way are we delivered from sin. In this way are we justified and made heirs of everlasting life.

In order to have faith you must paint a true portrait of Christ. The scholastics caricature Christ into a judge and tormentor. But Christ is no law giver. He is the Lifegiver. He is the Forgiver of sins. You must believe that Christ might have atoned for the sins of the world with one single drop of His blood. Instead, He shed His blood abundantly in order that He might give abundant satisfaction for our sins.

Here let me say, that these three things, faith, Christ, and imputation of righteousness, are to be joined together. Faith takes hold of Christ. God accounts this faith for righteousness.

This imputation of righteousness we need very much, because we are far from perfect. As long as we have this body, sin will dwell in our flesh. Then, too, we sometimes drive away the Holy Spirit; we fall into sin, like Peter, David, and other holy men. Nevertheless we may always take recourse to this fact, "that our sins are covered," and that "God will not lay them to our charge." Sin is not held against us for Christ's sake. Where Christ and faith are lacking, there is no remission or covering of sins, but only condemnation.

After we have taught faith in Christ, we teach good works. "Since you have found Christ by faith," we say, "begin now to work and do well. Love God and your neighbor. Call upon God, give thanks unto Him, praise Him, confess Him. These are good works. Let them flow from a cheerful heart, because you have remission of sin in Christ."

When crosses and afflictions come our way, we bear them patiently. "For Christ's yoke is easy, and His burden is light." When sin has been pardoned, and the conscience has been eased of its dreadful load, a Christian can endure all things in Christ.

To give a short definition of a Christian: A Christian is not somebody chalks sin, because of his faith in Christ. This doctrine brings comfort to consciences in serious trouble. When a person is a Christian he is above law and sin. When the Law accuses him, and sin wants to drive the wits out of him, a Christian looks to Christ. A Christian is free. He has no master except Christ. A Christian is greater than the whole world.

VERSE 16. Even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified.

The true way of becoming a Christian is to be justified by faith in Jesus Christ, and not by the works of the Law.

We know that we must also teach good works, but they must be taught in their proper turn, when the discussion is concerning works and not the article of justification.

Here the question arises by what means are we justified? We answer with Paul, "By faith only in Christ are we pronounced righteous, and not by works." Not that we reject good works. Far from it. But we will not allow ourselves to be removed from the anchorage of our salvation.

The Law is a good thing. But when the discussion is about justification, then is no time to drag in the Law. When we discuss justification we ought to speak of Christ and the benefits He has brought us.

Christ is no sheriff. He is "the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." (John 1:29.)

VERSE 16. That we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the Law.

We do not mean to say that the Law is bad. Only it is not able to justify us. To be at peace with God, we have need of a far better mediator than Moses or the Law. We must know that we are nothing. We must understand that we are merely beneficiaries and recipients of the treasures of Christ.

So far, the words of Paul were addressed to Peter. Now Paul turns to the Galatians and makes this summary statement:

VERSE 16. For by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

By the term "flesh" Paul does not understand manifest vices. Such sins he usually calls by their proper names, as adultery, fornication, etc. By "flesh" Paul understands what Jesus meant in the third chapter of John, "That which is born of the flesh is flesh". (John 3:6.) "Flesh" here means the whole nature of man, inclusive of reason and instincts. "This flesh," says Paul, "is not justified by the works of the law."

The papists do not believe this. They say, "A person who performs this good deed or that, deserves the forgiveness of his sins. A person who joins this or that holy order, has the promise of everlasting life."

To me it is a miracle that the Church, so long surrounded by vicious sects, has been able to survive at all. God must have been able to call a few who in their failure to discover any good in themselves to cite against the wrath and judgment of God, simply took to the suffering and death of Christ, and were saved by this simple faith.

Nevertheless God has punished the contempt of the Gospel and of Christ on the part of the papists, by turning them over to a reprobate state of mind in which they reject the Gospel, and receive with gusto the abominable rules, ordinances, and traditions of men in preference to the Word of God, until they went so far as to forbid marriage. God punished them justly, because they blasphemed the only Son of God.

This is, then, our general conclusion: "By the works of the law shall no flesh be justified."

Sola fide, sola gratia and sole Christo is the true antidote to all manifestations of judaizing Christianity.

Jack Cassidy

2005-02-16 16:08 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Actually, in his [url="http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/luther/gal/web/gal-inx.html"]Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians[/url], Luther makes a convincing case that these latter-day protestant judaizers are simply returning to Rome. [/QUOTE] No, these judaizers wouldn't be returning to Rome because for 1500 years of Christianity there was no real judaizing to speak of (and modern Jews are all too ready to point this out). I recall reading somewhere in St. Augustine something about Christianity needs to give the OT, in a sense, a proper and respectful burial. Apart from Luther this is not a Protestant sentiment. I have read enough Luther to know he is the one guy who shoots a gaping hole in my case. The only way I can reconcile this is to write it off as a product of his early Augustinian Catholic education. I'm sure Luther would have been horrified with the theology of the Puritans and Calvinists, esp. their identification with the OT Jews and seeking to establish Hebrew as the official language of an Early American colony. In the words of Martin Luther, "To the gallows with Moses!"

Texas Dissident

2005-02-16 16:22 | User Profile

[QUOTE=Jack Cassidy]I have read enough Luther to know he is the one guy who shoots a gaping hole in my case.

Mighty white answer of you, Jack. Not what I was expecting at all. Thank you. :)

I'm sure Luther would have been horrified with the theology of the Puritans and Calvinists, esp. their identification with the OT Jews and seeking to establish Hebrew as the official language of an Early American colony. In the words of Martin Luther, "To the gallows with Moses!"[/QUOTE]

American Christianity has almost always had a strong semi-Pelagian undercurrent. Think Finney, for example. The age old semi-Pelagian heresy that St. Augustine countered is, at bottom, the root of modern-day dispensational, judaizing and charismatic, mainstream American Christianity.

SCRIPTURESEZ

2005-02-18 18:46 | User Profile

[size=2]I see all sorts of posts that Jesus is not a Jew and the Law has passed away, but that is not what is said in scripture.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I am wondering if anyone can tell me what they think are the commands of Revelations 14:12?[/size]

[color=red][/color] [color=black]It all comes down to who you are going to believe the doctrines of the church or Rabbis or Yeshua (Jesus). Ask Jesus if this is correct or not, He will tell you.[/color] [color=red][/color] [color=red]Jesus is a decendant of Judah[/color]

Hebrews 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

I[color=blue] am proving to the readers of the blog that Jesus did not do away with the Torah or the Law, not one Jot or title, but that our forefathers were under the custodianship of the law. [/color]

[color=blue]If you are saying that the law or Torah passed away or that it puts you in bondage or legalism or is Judaising, you are saying that there is something wrong with the Torah and the Lawgiver. [/color]

[color=blue]But that is not the case Scripture says that the new or renewed covenant was because of the fault in us.[/color]

Hebrews 8 ⁷For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

[color=red]⁸For finding fault with them[/color], he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

⁹Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

¹⁰For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

¹¹And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. ¹²For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

[color=blue]Remember the old covenant was the Torah (or the Law) written on stone but when Jesus came the new renewed covenant is the Torah or the law written on hearts of flesh, and since we are once again hearing from God, through Jesus he can tell us how to keep the Law perfectly. That is if you beleive that he lives in you (tabernacles) in you and you are a holy temple, then you have the teaching and instruction of God on your heart, if you will listen to him. There is no evidence presented here or in the Scriptures that tells us that Jesus did away with any of the law that commands us to to keep the Sabbaths. [/color]

[color=blue]In fact, if we read the Bible closely we see that the first church or ekklesia or assembly or day of assembly or called out ones started in the wilderness those people were from the house of Judah the Whole House of Israel, as this was before the split of Judah and Ephraim that was solidified by Solomons time. Jesus is described as the Angel of the Lord that is the Torah Giver and he is the Phropet like Moses. [/color]

Acts 7: 37³⁷Ã¢â¬ÅThis is that Moses who told the Israelites, Ã¢â¬ËGod will send you a prophet like me from your own people.Ã¢â¬â¢^{[[url="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/index.php?search=acts%207&version=31#fen-NIV-27143h"][color=#800080]h[/color][/url]]} ³⁸He was in the assembly in the desert, with the angel who spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and with our fathers; and he received living words to pass on to us.

³⁹Ã¢â¬ÅBut our fathers refused to obey him. Instead, they rejected him and in their hearts turned back to Egypt. ⁴⁰They told Aaron, Ã¢â¬ËMake us gods who will go before us. As for this fellow Moses who led us out of EgyptÃ¢â¬âwe don't know what has happened to him!Ã¢â¬â¢^{[[url="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/index.php?search=acts%207&version=31#fen-NIV-27146i"][color=#800080]i[/color][/url]]} ⁴¹That was the time they made an idol in the form of a calf. They brought sacrifices to it and held a celebration in honor of what their hands had made. ⁴²But God turned away and gave them over to the worship of the heavenly bodies. This agrees with what is written in the book of the prophets: Ã¢â¬Å Ã¢â¬ËDid you bring me sacrifices and offerings forty years in the desert, O house of Israel? ⁴³You have lifted up the shrine of Molech and the star of your god Rephan, the idols you made to worship. Therefore I will send you into exileÃ¢â¬â¢^{[[url="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/index.php?search=acts%207&version=31#fen-NIV-27149j"][color=#800080]j[/color][/url]]} beyond Babylon.

⁴⁴Ã¢â¬ÅOur forefathers had the tabernacle of the Testimony with them in the desert. It had been made as God directed Moses, according to the pattern he had seen. ⁴⁵Having received the tabernacle, our fathers under Joshua brought it with them when they took the land from the nations God drove out before them. It remained in the land until the time of David, ⁴⁶who enjoyed God's favor and asked that he might provide a dwelling place for the God of Jacob.^{[[url="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/index.php?search=acts%207&version=31#fen-NIV-27152k"][color=#800080]k[/color][/url]]} ⁴⁷But it was Solomon who built the house for him.

⁴⁸Ã¢â¬ÅHowever, the Most High does not live in houses made by men. As the prophet says: ⁴⁹Ã¢â¬Å Ã¢â¬ËHeaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. What kind of house will you build for me? says the Lord. Or where will my resting place be? ⁵⁰Has not my hand made all these things?Ã¢â¬â¢^{[[url="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/index.php?search=acts%207&version=31#fen-NIV-27156l"][color=#800080]l[/color][/url]]} ⁵¹Ã¢â¬ÅYou stiffnecked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit! ⁵²Was there ever a prophet your fathers did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered himÃ¢â¬â ⁵³you who have received the law that was put into effect through angels but have not obeyed it.Ã¢â¬Â

[color=blue]So to be in this new or renewed covenant, one needs to be a member of either house, Judah or Israel (Ephraim) which equals the Whole House of Israel Or the whole house as in Acts 2. In other words you are going to be either a flesh and blood descendant of Judah. Or a flesh and blood or spiritual descendant of Ephraim to be grafted in. [/color]

[color=blue]Furthermore it appears that Sabbath keeping is a sign of the elect: [/color] color=blue[/color]

Exodus 31:12-14 [size=1]12[/size][size=2] And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, [/size][size=1]13[/size][size=2] Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you. [/size][size=1]14[/size][size=2] Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people. (KJV)[/size]

Exodus 13:9-16 [size=1]9 [/size][size=2]And it shall be for a sign unto thee upon thine hand, and for a memorial between thine eyes, that the LORD'S law may be in thy mouth: for with a strong hand hath the LORD brought thee out of Egypt. [/size][size=1]10 [/size][size=2]Thou shalt therefore keep this ordinance in his season from year to year. [/size][size=1]11 [/size][size=2]And it shall be when the LORD shall bring thee into the land of the Canaanites, as he sware unto thee and to thy fathers, and shall give it thee, [/size][size=1]12 [/size][size=2]That thou shalt set apart unto the LORD all that openeth the matrix, and every firstling that cometh of a beast which thou hast; the males shall be the LORD'S. [/size][size=1]13 [/size][size=2]And every firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb; and if thou wilt not redeem it, then thou shalt break his neck: and all the firstborn of man among thy children shalt thou redeem. [/size][size=1]14 [/size][size=2]And it shall be when thy son asketh thee in time to come, saying, What is this? that thou shalt say unto him, By strength of hand the LORD brought us out from Egypt, from the house of bondage: [/size][size=1]15 [/size][size=2]And it came to pass, when Pharaoh would hardly let us go, that the LORD slew all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man, and the firstborn of beast: therefore I sacrifice to the LORD all that openeth the matrix, being males; but all the firstborn of my children I redeem. [/size][size=1]16 [/size][size=2]And it shall be for a token upon thine hand, and for frontlets between thine eyes: for by strength of hand the LORD brought us forth out of Egypt. (KJV)[/size]

[color=blue]So it appears that none of the Law has passed away, but it is taught to use correctly by the lawgiver himself Jesus. Jesus not only keeps the Law, but he intrepets to us at a higher standard, he raises the bar of perfection. We know as people we could not attain it but we can pursue it. [/color]

[color=blue]Jesus explains to us how we can love our neighbor as ourselves. [/color]

[color=blue]Many of you critics wonder if we can keep the Festivals with animal sacrifices, but we can't because there is no Holy and Pure temple now, because the Muslims are there. Paul tells us to give Him the sacrifice of praise, but we are to remember the Feasts of the Lord. [/color]

[color=blue]There are many other commands that one cannot do, for instance the commands only for the Levitical priesthood etc. By the way according to Ezekial, the Levitical priesthood returns, as the son of Levi sons of Zadok. [/color] [color=blue]That is why Jesus tells us to listen to his voice and obey. If you don't you won't be eathing chicken with cheese because you wouldn't want to boil a kid in his own milk of his mother. What I am saying is that Jesus who is the God of Compassion and Mercy would never make anyone get 2 sets of dishes on for meat and one for milk. Its okay by me if the pious person wants to do that so they can feel safe, but as for me I want to keep what the Scripture said as taught to me by Jesus than what the Rabbis said or church fathers.[/color]

[color=blue]The thing to remember is that the Feasts and sacrifices were only shadows of the good things the Lord has for us. The Levitical priesthood was only a shadow of the the Priesthood of the Order of Melech-Tzadik that was going on in heaven. [/color]

[color=blue]After all His (Jesus) sacrifices it seems we should at least consider that we should keep the Feasts in the right way and the right day, don't you thiink? [/color]

[size=3][color=magenta]It sure beats dyeing easter eggs on the wrong day![/color][/size]

[color=blue]Paul was keeping the feast of of unleavened bread and he is telling us that it is a teaching about sin. [/color]

[color=blue]I am not telling anyone to get into the legalism of today's Judaism or yesteryears for that matter, to put fences and fences around the law until it becomes a heavy burden no man can bear. I am thinking here of some one's quip directing me to go read the Talmud. Would that be now the Babylonian Talmud or the Jerusalem Talmud? There are many great teachings there, I know, wise sayings of Good and Kind and decent Rabbis and again, some that were not. But that can be said of any population of humans.[/color]

[color=blue]I know that God does not waste my time, nor yours. There is a reason that I stumbled on this website. Maybe just to be the only dissenter among the originals, a very high honor indeed.[/color]

[color=blue]But you can see by now that I love the Lord and I know what I am talking about. I wonder if you wonder who I am and how long I have been a believer and so on. The answer would surprise many. But I will keep that to myself until we meet again. [/color]

[color=blue]But after all is said and done, I don't beleive that any person who says he or she worships Christ and then has an absolute vomit of hatred come out of him should continue to be that way or much less write it down.[/color]

[color=blue]It tells me for certain that person does not have the Fruit of the Spirit which is joy peace love brotherly charity and so on. But has some other spirit.[/color]

[color=blue]I noticed another thing while visiting you here, many many posts are tracking stories of some awesome evil fear or another. And yet far be it from the Lord to treat the Righteous and the Wicked alike! I even wrote one day I was living in Psalm 91 and boy did I get a post that totally misread what I was saying. Apparently that person does not think King David knew too much.[/color]

[color=blue]But the writers of Gods word also have told us one thing about the Jews that have not accepted the Lord or appeared to but that He himself has hardened their hearts but they will be grafted back onto the vine.[/color]

Romans 11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. ¹²But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring!

¹³I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I make much of my ministry ¹⁴in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them. ¹⁵For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? ¹⁶If the part of the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, then the whole batch is holy; if the root is holy, so are the branches.

¹⁷If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, ¹⁸do not boast over those branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. ¹⁹You will say then, Ã¢â¬ÅBranches were broken off so that I could be grafted in.Ã¢â¬Â ²⁰Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. ²¹For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.

²²Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off. ²³And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. ²⁴After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree! ²⁵I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. ²⁶And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: Ã¢â¬ÅThe deliverer will come from Zion; ** he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. ²⁷And this is^{[[url="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/index.php?search=romans%2011&version=31#fen-NIV-28222f"][color=#800080]f[/color][/url]]} my covenant with them ** **when I take away their sins.Ã¢â¬Â^{[[url="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/index.php?search=romans%2011&version=31#fen-NIV-28222g"][color=#800080]g[/color][/url]]} **

²⁸As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, ²⁹for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable. ³⁰Just as you who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a result of their disobedience, ³¹so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now^{[[url="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/index.php?search=romans%2011&version=31#fen-NIV-28226h"][color=#800080]h[/color][/url]]} receive mercy as a result of God's mercy to you. ³²For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

I pray that whoever reads this will have the understanding as provided by the Holy Spirit.

I have yet to see an answer to what I am saying.

Quantrill

2005-02-18 20:56 | User Profile

[QUOTE=SCRIPTURESEZ]This is the theology of church fathers not Scripture [size=2]I see all sorts of posts that Jesus is not a Jew and the Law has passed away, but that is not what is said in scripture. First of all, Scripture is the theology of the Church Fathers. The New Testament didn't just drop out of the sky. Secondly, nobody is saying the Law has passed away. We are saying it was fulfilled. Jesus himself said that He fulfilled it. I really don't know how to make it any clearer. In other threads I have spelled this idea out as simply as I think I'm able, and it is not such a hard concept to grasp. At this point, I think you are willfully misunderstanding me. [/size]
[QUOTE=SCRIPTURESEZ][size=2]I am wondering if anyone can tell me what they think are the commands of Revelations 14:12? Not Jewish kosher laws, if that's what you're insinuating. [/size]

SCRIPTURESEZ

2005-02-18 21:20 | User Profile

Still there is no Scripture saying that the law or the Torah passed away.
The Torah or the Law was written on our hearts and on our minds and Jesus has come to fulfil us and teach us The Law.

You could not know what sin is unless you know the LAW the Torah. Sin is transgression of the Law.

I ask you what are the commands as you understand them in Revelations 14:12?

and

Why do you think we should dye Easter Eggs and not celebrate the Festival of Firstfriuts?

Texas Dissident

2005-02-18 21:24 | User Profile

I think our judaizing friend may be a Seventh Day Adventist. Certainly sounds like one. Wonder if he knows what St. Paul wrote about those who try and keep even a little bit of the law?

Revelation 14:12 is basically part of a note of encouragement from St. John to the Christians being persecuted by Rome circa 70AD.

SCRIPTURESEZ

2005-02-18 21:37 | User Profile

I am not interested in the theology of the church fathers or rabbis, that's yeast.

There is no Scripture saying the Law has been done away with, or the commands.

Again, it is written:

Hebrews 8 ⁷For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

[color=red]⁸For finding fault with them[/color], he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Where does it say there was something changed from the old covenant, the Torah that was written on stone? The Torah is written on our hearts, the Law, the schoolteacher? That would be Yeshua.

So the commands must be the law.

Quantrill

2005-02-19 02:23 | User Profile

[quote=Quantrill]Secondly, nobody is saying the Law has passed away. We are saying it was fulfilled. Jesus himself said that He fulfilled it. I really don't know how to make it any clearer. [QUOTE=SCRIPTURESEZ] There is no Scripture saying the Law has been done away with, or the commands. This might be hopeless.

Blond Knight

2005-02-19 02:36 | User Profile

Tex, Quantrill;

Since Mad Russian is not posting a lot these days, please allow me to make one comment in regard to the broken record that keeps posting the same inane drivel: TROLL ALERT!, TROLL ALERT!.

Or, perhaps some village's idiot found out how to connect to the internet?

Happy Hacker

2005-02-19 04:24 | User Profile

[QUOTE=SCRIPTURESEZ][size=2]I see all sorts of posts that Jesus is not a Jew and the Law has passed away, but that is not what is said in scripture.[/size] [size=2][/size] [size=2]I am wondering if anyone can tell me what they think are the commands of Revelations 14:12?[/size][/QUOTE]

It's Revelation, not Revelations.

When you tell us that the Law has not passed away, is it your intent to say that Jesus has not fulfilled the Law?

SCRIPTURESEZ

2005-02-23 06:23 | User Profile

Jesus has fulfilled the law, but Scripture says not one jot or title has passed away. For you to say that Jesus has changed the Sabbath day or the Feasts and Festivals of the Lord and so on is like saying He was imperfect and needed to give us a new Law. But that is not what is being said.

The new covenant was the Torah, the law written on your hearts of flesh, not like the first written on stone.

Jesus is the Law, the word, the exact representation of God on earth. John 1:1 There is nothing wrong the the Law, see Heb 8:8, he found fault with people. He gave Moses the Law and while doing so they became of afraid, and did not want to talk to God. But we can know the law and all that applies to us, by reading the Scriptures and asking Jesus to guide us.

In fact it is written that if we have the Holy Spirit, we will want to keep the commands:
Ezekial 36:27 And I will put my Spirit within you and cause you towalk in my statutes and ye shall keep my judgements and do them.

We have a mediatior better than Moses which is Jesus, God himself to tell us how to keep the Law.

And in these last days we are told what is the sign of the elect? Those who know the Torah and the Messiah.

Revelations 12:17 Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to make war against the rest of her offspringÃ¢â¬âthose who obey God's commandments and hold to the testimony of Jesus.

Do you know who the real priests are?

[url="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=33&chapter=44&verse=23&version=31&context=verse"][color=#0000ff]Ezekiel 44:23[/color][/url] They are to teach my people the difference between the holy and the common and show them how to distinguish between the unclean and the clean. [url="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=33&chapter=44&verse=22&end_verse=24&version=31&context=context"][color=#800080]Ezekiel 44:22-24[/color][/url] (in Context) [url="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=33&chapter=44&version=31&context=chapter"][color=#0000ff]Ezekiel 44[/color][/url] (Whole Chapter) Stop going to teachers that do not know or care and keep on telling you God has changed His word.

Don't beleive me? Ask Jesus. Of course make sure it is His voice you are hearing, there are a lot of voices out there plus your own rebellious voice.