Pristine Grace
Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 7 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 237

Thread: Different Views..

  1. #121
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    381
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Thanks for your reply to my questions BK I think it allows us to really compare the two systems (theonomy and Christonomy). Let me remind you of how the ethical issue of slavery developed in America. Almost all Abolitionists were professed Christians. It started as a movement among Anabaptists The tract that started it all began with a quote of Matt. 25:40"The King will answer them, 'Most assuredly I tell you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.' with the direct implication that to enslave a Negro was to enslave Christ.
    Abraham Lincoln’s famous quote “since I would not be a slave so I would not own one” is a paraphrase of matt: 7:12Therefore whatever you desire for men to do to you, you shall also do to them; for this is the law and the prophets.
    See how simple and obvious the reasoning is no need for complicated hermetics.

    Oh yeah, one more thing, T. Whatever new testament principles(s) you would apply in answering this question, I would apply it (them) also.
    Of course you could but you didn’t I think this says something about Theonomy as a system
    Peace

  2. #122
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    103
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Smile Re: Different Views..


    Hello, I have been following along with this thread, and although I'm not sure I understand all that you are saying in pertaining to the law of the land, I am just wondering what you do with such verses as these, as pertaining to the believer and the law:

    Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: 4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. 5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. 6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

    II Cor 3:2 We are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men: 3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart. 4 And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward: 5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God; 6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. 7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: 8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? 9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. 10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. 11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious. 12 Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: 13 And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished.

    Gal 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

    Gal 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

    Romans 7:1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? 2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. 3 So then if, while [her] husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. 4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

    Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

    I Timothy 1:8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully; 9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers.

    How is it that the law is our rule of life when it is not made for a righteous man?

    And since whatsoever the Law says, it says to them that are under the Law, (Romans 3:19) and as the believer is not under the Law, (Romans 6:14,Gal 5:18) then what does the Law say to us who are not under it?

    How can the ministration of death, written and engraven on stones (2 Cor 3:7), be our rule of life?

    How can that which is done away with (2 Cor 3:11) and abolished (2 Cor 3:13) still remain the believer's rule of life?

    You ARE saying the law should be the believer's rule of life, aren't you? I do find that when I try to follow a rule, I seem to glory in myself when I think I follow the rule, as much as I don't want to. I check my progress for my assurance instead of just looking to Christ. Do you all not find yourselves doing the same?

    And although I do not believe that believers are not under the law, I sure do think it is good and holy and want to follow it because of my love for Christ, which he put within my heart. But I find daily that I cannot and am so thankful that I have a savior who did!

    Hope I'm not just way off base here on what you all are saying.

    An interesting discussion,

    Carol

    Run John Run! The Law commands,
    But gives me neither feet, nor hands,
    Far grander news the gospel brings,
    It bids me fly, and gives me wings.
    ----John Bunyan

    http://members.cox.net/ckizzz/index

  3. #123
    Moderator ugly_gaunt_cow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,030
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11
    Thanked in
    5 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Quote Originally Posted by CarolK
    Hello, I have been following along with this thread, and although I'm not sure I understand all that you are saying in pertaining to the law of the land, I am just wondering what you do with such verses as these, as pertaining to the believer and the law:

    Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: 4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. 5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. 6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

    II Cor 3:2 We are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men: 3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart. 4 And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward: 5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God; 6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. 7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: 8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? 9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. 10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. 11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious. 12 Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: 13 And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished.

    Gal 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

    Gal 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

    Romans 7:1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? 2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. 3 So then if, while [her] husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. 4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

    Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

    I Timothy 1:8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully; 9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers.

    How is it that the law is our rule of life when it is not made for a righteous man?

    And since whatsoever the Law says, it says to them that are under the Law, (Romans 3:19) and as the believer is not under the Law, (Romans 6:14,Gal 5:18) then what does the Law say to us who are not under it?

    How can the ministration of death, written and engraven on stones (2 Cor 3:7), be our rule of life?

    How can that which is done away with (2 Cor 3:11) and abolished (2 Cor 3:13) still remain the believer's rule of life?

    You ARE saying the law should be the believer's rule of life, aren't you? I do find that when I try to follow a rule, I seem to glory in myself when I think I follow the rule, as much as I don't want to. I check my progress for my assurance instead of just looking to Christ. Do you all not find yourselves doing the same?

    And although I do not believe that believers are not under the law, I sure do think it is good and holy and want to follow it because of my love for Christ, which he put within my heart. But I find daily that I cannot and am so thankful that I have a savior who did!

    Hope I'm not just way off base here on what you all are saying.

    An interesting discussion,

    Carol
    You forgot to mention the book of Acts, Chapter 15.

  4. #124
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Wild West Arizona
    Posts
    344
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Hi Carol,

    Glad to meet you. Here is what I think some of these passages are referring to …. Of course I maybe off on them from a Theonomic view but as a CT’er this is what I understand them to mean.

    Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: 4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. 5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. 6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

    This passage is referring to the inability of the law to “JUSTIFY” anyone. So my question to you from this passage is this …. What does it mean to “walk after the Spirit”? Does not the Spirit conform us to the likeness of Christ which is in fact obedience to God’s Law?

    2 Cor 3:2-13 again is speaking of man’s inability to be justified to God by our own righteousness. That is not the theonomist’s position. Again I think it goes back to what is the working of God in the believer’s heart? It seems pretty clear to me even more so in the NT that it is to transform us to obedience.

    Gal 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.


    This is exactly why I believe we are use the law as our rule of life. We now know how God wants us to conduct ourselves and thru the Spirit we can actually accomplish it. Because of our faith we are no longer condemned by the law, where as the reprobate is still under condemnation.

    Gal 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

    Again I ask you … what does it mean to be “lead by the Spirit”?

    Romans 7:1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? 2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. 3 So then if, while [her] husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. 4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

    This passage is to me is talking about being justified to God outside of Christ and the shear nonsense of thinking you are able. Now I must ask you … What do you think Paul means in verse 4 …. “that we might bear fruit unto God.” What fruit is Paul speaking of?

    (Rom 7:6 NASB) But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

    (Rom 7:7 NASB) What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, "YOU SHALL NOT COVET."

    I think yet again Paul is stating that the Law is our guide. The Law is what drives a person to their knees to beg forgiveness. That the Spirit writes the Law on our hearts and by the working of God in us we are able to be obedient.

    Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

    Only by the imputed righteousness of Christ are we found blameless before a Holy, Righteous God. The covenant of works is fulfilled in Christ. But it is still a covenant of works. This is where I think NCT also goes astray. Christ is our righteousness but we are still as saints called to obedience. Are we not? Please don't misunderstand me there ... our obedience doesn't even belong to us per say but to God ... Outside of the HS we are unable to be obedient. Yet we are commanded to strive to live righteous lives.

    I Timothy 1:8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully; 9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers.

    How is it that the law is our rule of life when it is not made for a righteous man?

    Who is righteous? The law was made to bring the sinner (believer) to his knees before a Holy, Righteous and Just God. Only those regenerated will see or realize their utter hopeless condition before God. That is why I believe Paul goes on to say in verse 15 … It is a trustworthy statement, deserving full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, among whom I am foremost of all.

    How can the ministration of death, written and engraven on stones (2 Cor 3:7), be our rule of life?

    It is now written on our heart not stone. Which is why the “new” covenant is so much better than the “old”. Carol … What does it mean to you to have the Law written on your heart? To me it is now an INWARD obedience not just an outward one.

    You ARE saying the law should be the believer's rule of life, aren't you? I do find that when I try to follow a rule, I seem to glory in myself when I think I follow the rule, as much as I don't want to. I check my progress for my assurance instead of just looking to Christ. Do you all not find yourselves doing the same?

    And although I do not believe that believers are not under the law, I sure do think it is good and holy and want to follow it because of my love for Christ, which he put within my heart. But I find daily that I cannot and am so thankful that I have a savior who did!

    I completely agree that we follow the Law and commandments because of our LOVE for Christ and it is in fact something put within our heart. Here is what seems to be getting confused here … and perhaps I am misreading your questions and closing statements but … No believer thinks they are able to live rules and be obedient to God outside of the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit. Whether you claim to be a Covenant believer or a New Covenant believer. It seems to me that many of the NCT believers accuse us of actually thinking we are able to live the law like the Pharisees tried to do. This is not the case nor is it the belief of what I see the “theonomists” claiming.

    I think I will let BK deal with this hahaha he is much smarter than I am and much more capable of answering … but I just had to put my 2 cents in.

    Carol as a Covenant believer I hope you don’t think I actually believe that I am justified outside the imputed righteousness of Christ and Christ alone.

    Well peace out for now and I hope I didn't misread or misunderstand your questions ... Thanks for joining in. This has been a very good learning experience for me. I was in a purple mood today hahaha .... Jan
    It is what it is

  5. #125
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Wild West Arizona
    Posts
    344
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugly_Gaunt_Cow
    You forgot to mention the book of Acts, Chapter 15.
    What in Acts 15 are you referring to?

    (Acts 15:28 NASB) "For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials:
    (Acts 15:29 NASB) that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication; if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will do well. Farewell."

    I wonder why they (the apostles) laid any burden on them (the gentiles) and said to abstain from things sacrificed or blood or fornication? I mean if we are free from the Law to do as we please ... why was anything mentioned?

    Again ... are we confusing ceremonial/sacrificial laws with moral laws?

    well ... i am outta here ... until next time ... Jan
    It is what it is

  6. #126
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    67
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Quote Originally Posted by doctr of grace
    I think that tomas needs to rethink his idea that the gospel and church growth leads to fewer laws. That could only be the case after the consummation of all things which is yet to happen.
    Well, after the consummation I don't think we will need ANY laws. At that point we won't have to worry about the noetic effects of sin, in which case the outworking of "natural law" and "revealed law" will be identical. They are, in fact, identical, of course, but since there will be no sin, the inscipturated version won't be needed. Interestingly, there is dispute over this point, as some see the role of government as not only essential in regards to deterring and punishing evil acts of men, but also for various administrative functions, even in a godly and sinless society. People in this camp would maintain that civil government for society would have been needed even if man had not fallen into sin. As for me, I tend toward the other view, though, which is that governments were ordained by God in a sin laden society solely to deter evil and punish evil acts.

    ...out

    ...BK
    For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ (2 Cor. 10:4,5)

  7. #127
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    67
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Hey, Eileen. Thanks for your response back on my question. I don't know if you'll still be around to hear my reply but if you are I hope you don't take this is a challenge. My goal is to try to edify others who have some passing interest in this.


    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen
    When I read and study the OT what always comes to my mind is 'the nation' of Israel and how God dealt with them as a nation.
    Yes, it's true that Israel was a nation in the OT. But as someone who holds to covenant theology you know that OT Israel was a TYPE, not the ANTETYPE. Israel in the OT was a TYPE which pointed to the CHURCH, the ANTETYPE, the true Israel of God made up of Jew and Gentile believers. In any case, I can't see how this would be a rebuttal against the theonomic principle, or how it would preclude the universality of God's moral laws, be they individual, ecclesiastical, or social. Plus, as I've already shown, God's law applied equally to nations other than Israel in the OT. Maybe someone can clarify this for me. It could be that I'm completely missing Eileen's point.


    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen
    Even when I study the individual lives of the great OT saints, Moses, Joseph, Abraham, David, etc. it seems that what I learn is how God used them in specific ways for "the nation'.
    Of course, but that's only because the fullness of the true Israel of God hadn't been realized at that time and, indeed, wouldn't until the advent of Christ. Again, I don't see who this precludes the theonomic principle.


    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen
    I don't see the NT as having a political agenda, instructing the Church, i.e., 'go and form this type of government', etc.
    That's true, but even in the OT there was a clear distinction between the function of church and state. They were separate INSTITUTIONS with specifically ordained functions and duties; the scope of their influence was limited by God's word itself. But just because they were separate INSTITUTIONS doesn't mean they weren't both accountable to God's law. The same is true today. Church and state are separate institutions with different functions and responsibilities and duties, but both are ministers of God in their own particular sphere of authority. As such both are under the obligation to submit to God's revealed law.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen
    The teaching focus of the NT is on the 'individual believer' and how we are to 'walk' as Christians as we sojurn here (for this truly is not our home).
    But you have plenty of that in the OT, too. Plus, why does God have to repeat his law in the NT when He specifically said that He doesn't change the principles of His laws?

    Ps. 119:160 - The entirety of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous judgments endures forever.

    Ps. 89:34 - My covenant I will not break, Nor alter the word that has gone out of My lips


    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen
    How we are to be light and salt in our homes, our jobs...
    Why not EVERY area of life, including politics? Why should we assume that Christ does not claim Lordship over this area, too?


    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen
    So to me it is the 'individual' believer that God works in and through, the church, etc. in establishing His Kingdom, not the re-establishing of the penalities of the OT law.
    If you believe in sovereign election and justification by faith alone, then God saved people in the OT INDIVIDUALLY, too. Again, not all Israel in the OT was the TRUE Israel (Rom. 9:6).


    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen
    I agree with you in that all of the law is a standard that we can look to for the principles that will benefit us in making laws for the nation; I just don't believe that is the call of the church.
    But I never said that this was a CHURCH function, but of individual believers who make up the church, bearing Christian witness and influence in the affairs of men in all areas possible. Again, none of this precludes man's basical need, which is redemption by the blood of Jesus. Too, if you believe the OT is a good standard and is righteous and just, then why not promote it? What other standard should we appeal to in promoting social justice? Surely you don't think the church should just surrender the political institution to the secularists without trying to be salt and light there, too... Anyway, I hope you change your mind and stay around a bit longer. Bye for now.

    ...out

    ...BK
    For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ (2 Cor. 10:4,5)

  8. #128
    Moderator Eileen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    756
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    CarolK,

    I'm not a representative 100% of any system; however I would consider myself more in line with covenant theology than NCT. In my limited mind and understanding I don't know the full scope of either theological camp and there are variations within both.

    So I can only speak for myself personally....

    Eph 1:5, 6, 7
    "Having predestined us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, 6 to the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved, 7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace.

    1 Pet 1:18, 19
    "Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptiible things, as silver and gold from your vain conversation received by traditions from your fathers; 19 but with the precious blood of Christ as of a lamb without blemish and without spot."

    I was redeemed by the Blood of the Lamb, not the law.

    Eph 2: 8,9
    "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9, Not of works lest any man should boast"

    I am saved by GRACE, not the law.

    Romans: 3:20
    "Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is knowledge of sin"

    Romans 3:24
    "Being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus."

    I am justified freely by His GRACE through the blood, not the law.

    Romans 4: 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
    "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousnes, 4, Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned og grace, but of debt. 5, But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness 6, Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, 7, saying blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sins are covered. 8, Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not inpute sin.

    I am righteous before God because I have been justified by the Blood of Christ , not the law.

    So.....I am saved by GRACE, Redeemed by the Blood of Christ, justified by GRACE alone and counted as righteous before God by GRACE, not works, my sins are forgiven me and covered and not inputed to me.

    There is nothing I can do, nothing I can't do that will separate me from the Love of God in Christ Jesus because it is all of Grace.....period.

    Only a person who truly is under Grace can truly love the law of God. Loving the law of God does not at all compute with trying to keep the law of God to merit something or compute to using it as a 'rule of life'. There is a VAST difference. To look into the OT is to be reminded of what is pointed to, to understand what Christ actually did keep for us, to understand better what Grace truly is and to rejoice that we are on this side of the cross. The inward desire ito even be obedient is all of grace.

    Are we not all actually talking the same language? It doesn't take away from Grace for me to love the law of God, to read it, to look into it and to rejoice in what it teaches me. It is most likely obvious that I have grown passionate over these issues so I think I will quilt for some R & R.

    Grace alone!
    "To those who have no works-phobia, I will state that you are not trembling before the gospel" Robert R. Higby

  9. #129
    Moderator Eileen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    756
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Ok BK.....
    I just did a whole post and lost the whole thing so this won't entail all that the first one did. I need to do the dishes!!!!!

    "Surely you don't think the church should just surrender the political institute to the seculariist without trying to be salt & light there too?"

    The church is actually "individual believers" and as such didn't we as individuals just take care of the above issue by turning out en masse to vote for the man that we believed had the best 'moral attributes'? So wouldn't that be individually fullfiling what you are talking about in the above quote?

    How about John 8: 3-11

    I typed it out in my first post but don't have the time now, but I believe you will be familiar with this one. The scribes and Pharisees bring a woman to Jesus who was actually caught in the act of adultery and what did they say:
    "Now Moses in the law commanded us that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?" And of coarse, we all know what Jesus said, "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her". There was no one without sin to stone her, was there? Jesus said "hath no man condemned thee and she said no man, Lord, and Jesus said Neither do I condemn thee: go and sin no more" This is a picture of an individual under Grace not an individual under the penalty of the law. Jesus did not condem her, should we? The Pharisees and the scribes were sure wanting to, weren't they? Wouldn't this have been an opportune time for Jesus to say, 'yes, stone her for the laws are still in effect' Isn't this what Theonomy is all about?? The bringing back of the penalty of the law? Wouldn't theonomy suggest stoning the woman for her adultery (or maybe a different way perhaps) when what Jesus did was forgive her. Isn't that the difference we are talking about?

    I still firmly believe that we can look to the whole of scripture for edification and for instruction without bringing the whole of the Old into the New, and I have grown weary from losing one post and trying to post another. Perhaps next time I can answer more of your post. For now, I'm off to do the dishes and get out my quilting needle!!!
    "To those who have no works-phobia, I will state that you are not trembling before the gospel" Robert R. Higby

  10. #130
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Wild West Arizona
    Posts
    344
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Quote Originally Posted by LoverOfLiberty
    Well, after the consummation I don't think we will need ANY laws. At that point we won't have to worry about the noetic effects of sin, in which case the outworking of "natural law" and "revealed law" will be identical. They are, in fact, identical, of course, but since there will be no sin, the inscipturated version won't be needed. Interestingly, there is dispute over this point, as some see the role of government as not only essential in regards to deterring and punishing evil acts of men, but also for various administrative functions, even in a godly and sinless society. People in this camp would maintain that civil government for society would have been needed even if man had not fallen into sin. As for me, I tend toward the other view, though, which is that governments were ordained by God in a sin laden society solely to deter evil and punish evil acts.

    ...out

    ...BK
    I completely agree that after the consummation the sinner/saint will be fully a saint. What I mean by that is that we will no longer sin. The sin nature is eradicated and we no longer are capable of sinning. I am wondering though .... Are not God's moral law's in fact eternal? Is that what you mean by the "natural laws" and "revealed laws" being identical? Isn't the way life is lived at that time is something we can only speculate about?

    BK ... what are you thoughts on the many civil laws of Israel being for that dispensation? Not like the dispensationalists believe ... I hope you understand my question. That the NT does in fact change much of that. What I think I am seeing from tomas is that the NT changes all of it. hmmm (don't want to put words in tomas' mouth) I am thinking specifically of "capital punishment" and even what Eileen said in her post about the woman that was accused of commiting adultery. I know we have discussed it some before but I am still somewhat confused as to why you think that Jesus did what he did. Would not his action suggest that the ummm to death of people because of this sin was changed much the same way the laws about dietary restrictions were changed. Am I comparing apples with oranges? I guess I am thinking that it isn't as black and white as I thought it was. That much interpretation would be required and as fallen humans this could be far from perfect.

    I think Eileen has brought out some interesting points. Although I think in 1 Peter ... Peter makes the connection of the Church and Israel both being called a holy nation. So I think I must agree with BK's comments about saints in the OT being saved individually and that the church is in fact considered a nation by God.

    (1 Pet 2:9 NASB) But you are A CHOSEN RACE, A royal PRIESTHOOD, A HOLY NATION, A PEOPLE FOR God's OWN POSSESSION, that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light;

    I can also see with this (theonomy) the tendency to focus more on the law rather than the gospel. Gosh I sure hope that doesn't cause you to be upset because I know you have spent a ton of time answering folks questions on it. How would you balance the two out? I also can see I need to read more about it. I sure appreciate your time in this and I am definately interested in reading up more about it.

    Well I am outta here for now ... God Bless ... Jan
    It is what it is

  11. #131
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Wild West Arizona
    Posts
    344
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen
    Ok BK.....
    I just did a whole post and lost the whole thing so this won't entail all that the first one did. I need to do the dishes!!!!! ....
    I still firmly believe that we can look to the whole of scripture for edification and for instruction without bringing the whole of the Old into the New, and I have grown weary from losing one post and trying to post another. Perhaps next time I can answer more of your post. For now, I'm off to do the dishes and get out my quilting needle!!!
    I hate when I lose a post !!! I appreciate what you rewrote and I hope you were able to get to that quilting needle after the dishes. I am not sure that theonomists want "the whole" of the Old brought into the New. But a good point that perhaps BK would like to clarify.
    It is what it is

  12. #132
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Shawnee, KS
    Posts
    70
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    This is all very confusing. if i may ask what is the whole presuppositional in apologetics idea? I understand the concept of the ot law being upheld and i understand postmil eschatology and amill and i'm more or less still debating where i stand. But what is the presuppositional apologetics approach? and whats a good book by bahnson because i have read somethings online by him and they were good.
    The first effect of regeneration is to open the eyes of our understanding to the excellency of divine truth. The second effect the going forth of the renewed affections toward that excellency perceived.

  13. #133
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    67
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Quote Originally Posted by bauerpauer
    This is all very confusing. if i may ask what is the whole presuppositional in apologetics idea?... But what is the presuppositional apologetics approach? and whats a good book by bahnson because i have read somethings online by him and they were good.
    For those unfamiliar with the term, Christian 'apologetics' is simply a term which means to give a defense of the Christian faith. The presuppositional approach to apologetics was systematized by Cornelius Van Til, the long time apologetics professor at Westminster Theological Seminary, and later popularized by his best student, the late Greg L. Bahnsen. The approach is probably best described as "worldview apologetics". It recognizes that any system of thought, theistic or not, is built upon certain fundamental convictions or "presuppositions" or, if I may, "faith commitments" about the nature of reality, knowledge, ethics, man, origins, man's problem in this world, man's essential need, how to fix what's wrong with man, etc. Obviously faith commitments about such areas as what reality is like, the limits and scope of human knowledge, etc. is a faith commitment since no man has exhaustive knowledge of the whole of reality. Also, presuppositional apologetics insists on maintaining the antithesis between Christian thought and unbelieving thought, which I do think is biblical.

    In practice presuppositional apologetics plays itself out by doing an internal critique of the non-Christian philosophical system in order to demonstrate its futility and inability to provide the necessary foundations of how we can know and understand reality and our experience. It seeks to show the futility of the non-Christian system by demonstrating that on its own terms and definitions, the non-Christian system reduces to absurdity or skepticism. Then it seeks to show that these difficulties can be overcome if you being your inquiry with Christian presuppositions, that is, as found in the bible. It is modeled, I think, after Paul's defense at Mars Hill in Acts 17, where Paul clearly maintained an antithetical approach, and also from the teaching of Prov. 26:4,5.

    Personally, I think the presuppositional approch is the biblical one, since it recognizes the Lordship of Christ in our thinking. However, I do believe that some have taken the method too far by making an idol out of an argument. I see it as an extension and part of evangelism and discipleship, which is the way both Van Til and Bahnsen saw it, as well.

    As far as material on it, a good beginning point would be Greg Bahnsen's book "Always Ready". Another good option is to get some of Greg Bahnsen's audio tapes or MP3's on the subject. You can find these at

    www.cmfnow.com

    ...out

    ...BK
    For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ (2 Cor. 10:4,5)

  14. #134
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    103
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Hello Jan,

    What does it mean to “walk after the Spirit”?

    Well, I believe it means to be motivated in life by faith in and love for Christ, rather than by legal fear. In walking after the spirit, we will produce fruit. Fruit being:

    Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. 24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. 25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. 26 Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.

    AND:

    Gal 5:18 If ye be led by the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

    Trying to keep the ten commandments would, of course, be a byproduct of walking in the spirit, but not the goal of it.

    How would you feel if your spouse gave you a set of rules to live by? I know I wouldn't like it, --but out of love for him, I want to and will try to do the right things concerning him, without the rules. In a love relationship, there is no need for rules.

    Just as an intoxicated person is under the control of alcohol, a true believer is under the control of the holy spirit. We just naturally want to do the right things (even though we fail so often).

    I am wondering if you also believe that sanctification is progressive, that we become more and more holy as we keep the rules?

    Well, thanks for conversing with me. And no, I don’t think you actually believe that you are justified outside the imputed righteousness of Christ and Christ alone. But I am speaking here of sanctification, not justification.

    Carol
    Run John Run! The Law commands,
    But gives me neither feet, nor hands,
    Far grander news the gospel brings,
    It bids me fly, and gives me wings.
    ----John Bunyan

    http://members.cox.net/ckizzz/index

  15. #135
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Shawnee, KS
    Posts
    70
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    If I may put in my 2 cents on John 8:3-11.. or whatever your bible may have it as.. some have it as John 7. I don't necessarily believe that this should be in the bible. It was not found among the original manuscripts, that has been proven. If you look at most bibles as long as they aren't 'life application' or whatever you will see in brackets or somewhere a note about it being not found in the original manuscripts and was found in 'later manuscripts' then it was added and it is sometimes in john 7 and sometimes john 8. Just my 2 cents..
    The first effect of regeneration is to open the eyes of our understanding to the excellency of divine truth. The second effect the going forth of the renewed affections toward that excellency perceived.

  16. #136
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Wild West Arizona
    Posts
    344
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Quote Originally Posted by CarolK
    Hello Jan,

    What does it mean to “walk after the Spirit”?

    Well, I believe it means to be motivated in life by faith in and love for Christ, rather than by legal fear. In walking after the spirit, we will produce fruit. Fruit being:

    Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. 24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. 25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. 26 Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.

    AND:

    Gal 5:18 If ye be led by the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

    Trying to keep the ten commandments would, of course, be a byproduct of walking in the spirit, but not the goal of it.

    How would you feel if your spouse gave you a set of rules to live by? I know I wouldn't like it, --but out of love for him, I want to and will try to do the right things concerning him, without the rules. In a love relationship, there is no need for rules.

    Just as an intoxicated person is under the control of alcohol, a true believer is under the control of the holy spirit. We just naturally want to do the right things (even though we fail so often).

    I am wondering if you also believe that sanctification is progressive, that we become more and more holy as we keep the rules?

    Well, thanks for conversing with me. And no, I don’t think you actually believe that you are justified outside the imputed righteousness of Christ and Christ alone. But I am speaking here of sanctification, not justification.

    Carol
    Whew I am sure glad you don't think that I believe I earn my salvation. I do very much believe in progressive santification if I am understanding the terminology the same as you do. I believe that everyday is a growing process and a process of yielding myself to God and not to myself. I think Paul made an excellent analogy of santification when comparing it to race. A very long race for some of us.

    My obedience ... and let me repeat this because I said it in my earlier post is ONLY BECAUSE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT!!!! I can do NOTHING righteous outside of His working. I can't love as God would have me love. I can't be joyful as God would have me be joyful. I can't have peace, be long suffering, be gentle or good and especially I can't have faith unless I have been given the Holy Spirit that dwells within us believers. I would think we would probably both agree on that.

    Here is the thing for me Carol ... Rules are not something that are bad. They are guidelines and ways of determining right and wrong. They are not something that is "FORCED" by God but because of my love for God I love his LAW, I love his RULES and I try to obey Him. The Law is much more to me than a set of rules. Think of David and psalms ... Perhaps I should post a few ... and His absolute love of God's law and statues. The only reason I love His law, and in fact Him is because of the NEW HEART that God granted me. As a dead sinner you BY NATURE hate God, Hate his "rules", and therefore do what you can to run from them. As a believer you CLING to them. HMMM I hope that makes sense because I think I am having a difficult time explaining myself to you.

    So I am getting the feeling that you don't believe in progressive santification ... Perhaps you could expound on that a bit. I am curious what santification means to you.

    Thanks for conversing with me and I hope to carry on with this topic as well as others in the future.

    Well I am outta here for dinner .... Jan
    It is what it is

  17. #137
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Wild West Arizona
    Posts
    344
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Carol,

    I took a few minutes to look up some appropriate verses about how I understand the Law and God's commandments are to be applied in my life. It is a LOVE of God that causes me to strive and desire to have them as a central part of my life. They are not "rules" that are meant to cause us bondage. They are what they are and I hope this helps you understand where I am coming from.

    (Psa 1:2 KJV) But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.

    (Psa 19:8 KJV) The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.

    (Psa 119:15-16 KJV) I will meditate in thy precepts, and have respect unto thy ways. I will delight myself in thy statutes: I will not forget thy word.

    (Psa 119:159 KJV) Consider how I love thy precepts: quicken me, O LORD, according to thy lovingkindness.

    Actually you could read the entire psalm 119 and leave KNOWING how one should feel about the Law and God's commandments ... They are for OUR ENJOYMENT and where true joy is found.


    (Prov 6:23 KJV) For the commandment is a lamp; and the law is light; and reproofs of instruction are the way of life:

    (Prov 13:13 KJV) Whoso despiseth the word shall be destroyed: but he that feareth the commandment shall be rewarded.

    (John 14:15 KJV) If ye love me, keep my commandments.


    (1 John 3:22 KJV) And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.

    (1 John 2:3 KJV) And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.

    Bye for now ... Hope to hear from you soon ... Jan
    It is what it is

  18. #138
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    103
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Hi Jan,

    Those are good verses and I must say that I, too love the law of God and want to keep it. I don't know, perhaps we are saying the same thing. Kind of sounds like it. I just don't like the terminology 'rule of life.' And to me the bible is not a book that says 'Do, do, do,' but a book that says "Done, done, done.' I find such comfort in that. And looking at it that way causes me to love Christ so much and focus on what he did for me instead of what I can do for him. BUT at the same time, it makes me want to do as he tells me to.
    As a dead sinner you BY NATURE hate God, Hate his "rules", and therefore do what you can to run from them.

    I agree with part of this statement, that dead sinners by nature hate God, but not that dead sinners hate his rules and run from them. I know of many professed christians that try really hard to keep God's laws.

    Anyway... as far as progressive sanctification. I believe that a person is made positionally holy by the imputation of Christ's righteousness to us. I do not believe that we become progressively holier as we go along. I do believe we grow in grace and knowledge, but not grow in holiness by works which we do. We are completely holy in our 'person' as believers, but not in our 'character and conduct' and will not be in our character and conduct until we go to be with the Lord in heaven. I do not believe there are degrees of holiness, depending on our works or our faith or repentance or whatever. As I said we are justified and sanctified by the imputation of Christ's righteousness.

    Well, that's it for my thoughts.

    Carol
    Run John Run! The Law commands,
    But gives me neither feet, nor hands,
    Far grander news the gospel brings,
    It bids me fly, and gives me wings.
    ----John Bunyan

    http://members.cox.net/ckizzz/index

  19. #139
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    381
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    HEY Guys
    I have a few more real questions.
    If the written OT law is so important for sanctification how could Job be considered blameless and upright when he had no access to it?

    How could Enoch walk with God when he had no written commands to guide him?

    How could Noah find favor in the eyes of the Lord before the law was given at Sinai?

    Now that I think about those are all the same question.

    Jan just so you know like you and David I love the law of God. It’s just that I think that the Law of Christ supersedes the Law of Moses.

    Heb12For the priesthood being changed, there is of necessity a change made also in the law. 7:13For he of whom these things are said belongs to another tribe, from which no one has officiated at the altar. 7:14For it is evident that our Lord has sprung out of Judah, about which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood. 7:15This is yet more abundantly evident, if after the likeness of Melchizedek there arises another priest, 7:16who has been made, not after the law of a fleshly commandment, but after the power of an endless life: 7:17for it is testified,
    "You are a priest forever,
    According to the order of Melchizedek."
    7:18 For there is an annulling of a foregoing commandment because of its weakness and uselessness 7:19(for the law made nothing perfect), and a bringing in thereupon of a better hope, through which we draw near to God. 7:20Inasmuch as he was not made priest without the taking of an oath 7:21(for they indeed have been made priests without an oath), but he with an oath by him that says of him,
    "The Lord swore and will not change his mind,
    'You are a priest forever,
    According to the order of Melchizedek'".
    7:22By so much has Jesus become the collateral of a better covenant.

    It amuses me when NCT folks are called antominion especially when we affirm a higher standard than the big ten
    It was BK who called the New Testament law the equivalent of a suggestion to play fair.

    By the way Carol That Bunyan quote is the coolest!!!

    Peace and Grace

  20. #140
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Wild West Arizona
    Posts
    344
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Hey tomas and carol ya'all are killin me here! You really think I discount the power of GRACE over the law? wow ... you and carol are really misunderstanding me I think .

    Job was found righteous and blameless for the same reason you and I are. Not of our own ability but that of God's ability. Job was saved the same way you are saved. I am sure we would agree on that .

    Hebrews 11 answers the Noah question much more eloquently than I can.

    The "BETTER" covenant is because of our very literal INDWELLING of the Holy Spirit. Folks the moral law of God hasn't gone anywhere. The moral Law of God isn't something that should be thrown away. The Heart change we have been granted and the LAW yes folks the LAW has been written upon our hearts. Come now tomas ... does the Holy Spirit indwell us to discount or no longer strive to live the law? What can it possibly mean to be "conformed to the likeness of Christ" when Christ is in fact PERFECT righteousness.

    Christian ethics have a subject, goal and motivation ... what are yours?

    Goodness sakes alive ... I still am having a hard time figuring out why you seem to be so ummm for lack of a better term ... anti-law. Oh I think there is a theological term for that "antinomian". Well perhaps that is too strong but wow I think I will have to think on this one.

    Well thanks for the reply and I am not upset at all and I hope I don't upset you ... I think I am merely a bit stunned is all. tomas ... what exactly is the "law of Christ" that supercedes the law of moses? Christ expanded the Law of Moses he didn't REWRITE IT.

    anyways GRACE and peace out .... Jan
    It is what it is

Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 7 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Hitler went to Heaven
    By Jack Daw in forum General Discussion Archive
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-08-06, 04:23 PM
  2. Chaplain of U.S. House to celebrate Red Mass in Manchester
    By Reformed Presby in forum General Discussion Archive
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-18-05, 08:55 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •