Pristine Grace
Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 11 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 237

Thread: Different Views..

  1. #201
    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 Eileen

    Another way I look at the differences on the way of discussing the 'rule of life' is that I consider myself under the rule of the King, not the King's law. I am afterall, a child of the King.

    What does that mean......I don't get up in the morning and look to the law for the days strength, activity or providential care. I look to the King.
    Eileen, I love the way your articulate your points. I might need to just shut up for a while and let you keep writing and then allow myself to be edified by what you write... I for one, thought that this was an excellent observation. The state of affairs reduces to two options. Are we slaves of the only true master, who is Christ? Or are we slaves to ourselves and our autonomy and without Christ, in which case we place ourselves under the law's curse and its demand to keep it perfectly and, therefore, end up in death and hopelessness and enslavement to sin?

    Rom. 6:14 - For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

    Rom. 6:16 - Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one's slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness?

    Rom. 6:22 - But now having been set free from sin, and having become slaves of God, you have your fruit to holiness, and the end, everlasting life.


    I think a good follow-up passage which illustrates the unbelieving mindset and the mindset of the Christian:

    Rom. 8:6,7 - 6For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. 7Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be.

    In this passage, notice the parallel between being spiritually minded and having life and peace (vs. 6) and being subject to the law of God (vs. 7). In vs. 7 to be carnally minded is to NOT be subject to the law of God; the implication is that those who ARE spiritually minded ARE subject to the law of God. Not in a legalistic sense, but are set free from enslavement to their sin nature and follow the Lord who produces in the fruit and obedience to His righteous moral standards. As much as walking in the Spirit produces fruit (Gal. 5) so it also produces righteousness and obedience to the law of God. This is clear by considering these passages within this same context:

    1 John 2:3 - Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments.

    1 John 5:3 - For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome.

    Thanks, Eileen.


    ...peace 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)

  2. #202
    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 Ian Potts

    We understand the Old Testament in the light of the New Testament. If Galatians 3 tells us that the law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, then we know the law has its use. It convicted of sin and brought us to Christ. “But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster” Galatians 3:25. And from this verse we realise that now being in Christ we are no longer under the law, no longer under the schoolmaster. We have a NEW guide – Christ, to whom we look by faith, walking in the Spirit.


    This is very true. But can the law have more than one function for a person? It brings us to Christ but what about after our regeneration? I think further down you say .... The law is in fact used by the Holy Spirit to show us how a Christian is to live. See I believe the Law actually has several applications. First to show us the Holiness of God. Then to show us our utter inability to live as God would have us live outside of Christ therefore causing us to Cling to Christ and his righteousness it literally points us to Christ! It is a guide and instruction as to how a person lives once he belongs to God. I would agree with you on what Romans 7 is demonstrating. It is impossible to keep the law. The law is death to those that don't repent and believe and walk by faith. There is no argument there. But the law can be life for the believer through the working of the Holy Spirit. I realize you don't care from my symantics there but that is truly how I see scripture and the law being "fulfilled in us".... Romans 8.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Potts
    Would you agree with the statements made in 7:4 and 7:6 that we are delivered from the law? Dead to it?

    Yes of course we are delivered from the law and the curse of the law. As a believer it is no longer me but Christ's righteousness that God sees. I am dead to it in the sense that I am no longer judged by it but judged by Christ's ability to keep it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Potts
    Perhaps you would answer that that is only in the ‘sense’ of justification? Well what about the walking in the Spirit, not after the flesh, which Paul moves on to in 8:1? Is that regarding justification or his walk?

    Yes of course in the sense of justification but I would also say in the sense of santification as well. As I read on in Romans 8 - I see that the natural man "unregenerate" can do nothing but walk in the flesh. As a believer I can now do what pleases God. Ian ... to be obedient to God is what pleases Him ... I think that is all a theonomist is suggesting. You are putting more into it then is there and we are arguing about something that simply isn't believed by the theonomist.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Potts
    You say that the law now lives in us not outside of us. Well if you believe that why do you turn to the law EXTERNALLY as a guide as if there is no guide living within you? If the law is within you then it will cause you to know right from wrong instinctively will it not?

    Ian how is using the Law as my guide turning it from something internal to something external? I really don't usually answer a question with a question but this one really requires that. I don't believe that allowing the OT guidelines used in the light of NT revelation and application is an external ONLY thing. Again from Romans 8:7 and 1 Cor 2:14 we see that ONLY the believer is capable of living an obedient life. Am I suggesting that is a 24/7 accomplishment ... of course not and I would merely point to you my previous posts about my own personal struggle with dealing with my sin nature as we speak!
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Potts
    Well what rules did Adam have in the garden? Only one, and he broke that.

    That is all it takes is one and we are not completely sure that is the only one (that is really neither here nor there in this illustration or conversation) ... Adam obviously had the propensity to sin so I am not sure what exactly that has to do with all of this. By suggesting the above it appears you are again missing the point. It doesn't have to do with my ability to "KEEP" the rules but has everything to do with the fact that the RULES exist for my guidence and acceptance. As stated by Nathan to David in 2 Samuel to despise God's commandments is to DESPISE GOD ...

    (2 Sam 12:9 KJV) Wherefore hast thou despised the commandment of the LORD, to do evil in his sight? thou hast killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and hast taken his wife to be thy wife, and hast slain him with the sword of the children of Ammon.
    (2 Sam 12:10 KJV) Now therefore the sword shall never depart from thine house; because thou hast despised me, and hast taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be thy wife."

    Again ... as a believer Ian I don't find the law offensive or does it lay heavily upon me. The only reason it doesn't is because of the Holy Spirit. I really don't think you are getting this. So I think this is becoming an exercise in furtility. Thanks for that passage BK. It says just what it says!
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Potts
    What of Abraham?

    No problem here ... I completely agree that we live by faith walking upright in the statues of our Lord and King by faith and faith alone.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Potts
    But if we return to the law as our ‘guide’ we do frustrate the grace of God, for we turn from Christ in whom we walk back to the law as though Christ is not sufficient to guide us by His Spirit.

    If you are turning to law as a means of justification ... this is NOT and I must repeat this yet again NOT what is being stated. Ian it boils down to this > How does the Holy Spirit guide us? I believe it is by and through what God has laid down as His rule for our life. Let's not inject there that it is something accomplished outside of the Holy Spirit because it surely isn't.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Potts
    The fruit of the Spirit. “Love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance” Gal 5:22-23.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Potts

    All fruit brought forth by God in our lives. Fruit which will produce outward conduct which DOES NOT break the law, but conduct which is not MOTIVATED or PRODUCED BY the law. Can you see the difference? I’m not advocating breaking the law – what it says is right. But the New Testament teaches us that we actually fulfil the law NOT BY USING THE LAW but by walking in the Spirit under grace. So I don’t disregard the law but I don’t use it as my ‘rule of life’. No, the Gospel is. Christ is. Faith is.

    Of course I see the difference. Ian I still have no idea what you mean by "walking in the Spirit". The fruits mentioned above are in fact lived outwardly by the believer that in fact does what he can to live God's law. If the law is not used by you then it is in fact disgarded. By pointing us to Christ I believe the Spirit points us to His righteousness. Now I must ask you ... What does it mean to be conformed to the likeness of Christ? If Christ is our righteousness and Christ is ALL righteousness to be conformed to Him is to be conformed to righteousness does it not? Not perfection mind you but an ever growing ability to "walk in the Spirit".
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Potts
    Now I ask you – if the old covenant decayeth and is ready to vanish away, what has vanished away? Surely you have to admit that we are in the new covenant not the old? That the Levitical priesthood is no longer? That we don’t offer up animal sacrifices in the Temple?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Potts

    Then what do you glean from those scriptures which teach those things?

    Well they speak of Christ don’t they?

    Of course they speak of Christ. The law used as a means of justification has vanished away. Not the Law itself. The new covenant is why we as believers are even capable of ANY obedience to God ... By the WORKING of the Holy Spirit. The law has indeed been written on my heart of flesh and God has in fact removed my heart of stone.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Potts
    And that is why we love those scriptures for they point us to Him and to His finished work. We don't love those scriptures because they instruct us in how to build our 'tabernacles' or how to dress our priests or how to offer up animal sacrifices. We aren't 'under' those rules. No, we love those scriptures because they point us in type and figure to Christ and His Gospel. We see Christ in them!
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Potts
    Both you and I would agree on that would we not? We’d also agree that we are not under that covenant, so when God commanded Israel to keep all those ceremonial laws, we believe we are not bound by those laws in an external sense but that they have been fulfilled for us in Christ. Hence we love those laws as they point us to Christ and His one sacrifice for sin. We agree on that, do we not?

    Of Course!!!! You are again forgetting that as a theonomist I believe you can interrupt OT scripture in light of NT scripture. Please read BK's response to the ceremonial/sacrificial laws in an earlier post ... I shall repost it for you.
    Quote Originally Posted by LoverofLiberty

    Let me clarify something here. When it comes to the ceremonial or dietary aspects of the law we do NOT believe they have been done away with. Let me explain what I mean by this. While it's certainly true that progressive revelation in the NT specifically tells us that the way these laws were observed in their external and outward form in the OT is no longer binding, we do not say that the LAW itself has been done away with. It's the MODE of application of these laws that has changed. God ALWAYS has and ALWAYS will require substitionary blood atonement on behalf of a sinner if he is to be in God's presence and be seen by God as fully righteous. Guilt has to be imputed to the acceptable substitute and righteousness has to be imputed to the sinner. In the OT this principle was administered by the sacrificial system, among other things which served as pedagogical elements to point people to Christ, who was the object of what those things foreshadowed. In the NT, however, the substance of what those things pointed to has come and, therefore, we no longer need the foreshadows. However, as I've said before, it's on the authority of Scripture alone that I make this determination. Nonetheless, the PRINCIPLE of God requiring substitionary blood atonement is UNIVERSAL and UNALTERABLE.

    Moreover, an examination of even the NT will show that God still requires sacrifices today. No, I'm not talking about the killing of animals. In the OT the giving of sacrifices required a contrite heart that went along with the actual outward act of giving the sacrifice. Today we still give sacrifice from the heart but in a different way. Today the sacrifice finds its fulfillment in personal piety to the Lord, and acts of mercy and Christian charity. I think you'll get the point with the following verses:

    Romans 12:1 - I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service.

    Philippians 2:17 - Yes, and if I am being poured out as a drink offering on the sacrifice and service of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with you all.

    Philippians 4:18 - Indeed I have all and abound. I am full, having received from Epaphroditus the things sent from you, a sweet-smelling aroma, an acceptable sacrifice, well pleasing to God.

    Hebrews 13:15,16 - Therefore by Him let us continually offer the sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to His name. But do not forget to do good and to share, for with such sacrifices God is well pleased.

    1 Peter 2:5 - you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.


    Similarly, the PRINCIPLE illustrated by the dietary laws remains binding also, even though the way in which they are observed in the new covenant age has changed. The dietary laws and cleanliness provisions were set in place in order to illustrate to the Jews (in an outward sense) that they are to be consecrated before the Lord. They were to be set apart as God's own people. This principle was observed in the OT by the Jew/Gentile distinction, but in the NT we see that this distinction of Jew/Gentile is no more. Nonetheless, the principle that God requires his people to be consecrated and set apart to Him has not changed. According to the NT, it's observed today not in the shadowy Jew/Gentile distinction but in the church/world distinction. We are to disciple the nations and exert Christian influence wherever possible and wherever God places us; but we don't engage in the actual pagan practices of our unbelieving culture. So, again, in none of these instances has the PRINCIPLE that is illustrated by the laws CHANGED. The principles behind what God requires is always right and just even if the mode of administration changes. Again, let me post a couple relevant verses in order to hopefully drive this point home:

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

    Psalm 111:7,8 - The works of His hands are verity and justice; All His precepts are sure. They stand fast forever and ever, And are done in truth and uprightness.

    Psalm 119:160 - The entirety of Your word is truth, and every one of Your righteous judgments endures forever.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Potts
    But the Spirit doesn’t work in a vacuum. He does use the scriptures, He speaks to us through the scriptures, ALL the scriptures (hence I don’t reject any of them). But He instructs us in the right use of those scriptures, what applies to whom. The lawful use of the law. And most of all He points us to Christ in ALL the scriptures, and reveals Him to us that we might follow Him, walking in the Spirit. And if ‘ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law’.

    I couldn’t agree with you more. The Spirit doesn’t work in or through a vacuum … Thanks for admitting that. Although I am not sure what you mean by “what applies to whom.”??
    Sorry about the length of this post!!! Forgive me but Ian asked me lots of questions and I wanted to answer them to best of my ability.
    Thank you Ian for your thoughts and I see that we in fact do agree on some points.
    GRACE and PEACE out for now …. Jan
    It is what it is

  3. #203
    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 Eileen
    BK
    Hi, Eileen...hehehe


    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen
    When I read your post in answer to the woman caught in adultery, several scriptures came instantly to my mind so....those are what will be my answer to you.
    I did read your reply to me on the John 8:2-11 passage about the woman caught by the Jews in adultery, and I have some comments on it. But before I give you my thoughts, let me ask you a couple of questions. (This will probably tip you off as to where I will be going with my answer to you.)... This is meant to be both illustrative and fun. Here are the questions:


    (1) If someone is unregenerate and engages in the act of shoplifting but then becomes a Christian during the period of due process, should he be absolved and forgiven of his crime, since He is now totally and completely forgiven in God's sight?

    (2) Should a Christian who received a speeding ticket be allowed to plead innocent before the court, using as his defense the fact that he has been redeemed by the blood of Christ and, therefore, declared "not guilty" of all sin and wrongdoing?


    Why would you answer 'yes' or 'no' to the above questions?

    ...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)

  4. #204
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Honiton, Devon, England
    Posts
    102
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Quote Originally Posted by doctr of grace
    Ian how is using the Law as my guide turning it from something internal to something external?

    Because the law when one reads it in scripture IS external to us. You aren’t reading ‘what is written upon your heart’ - you are reading what is outside of yourself on the pages of the Bible. Whether or not that agrees with your new internal heart nature is neither here nor there – the law as a guide as you read it in scripture is external to you. But if you say that it is written upon your heart as a work of the Spirit, and the Spirit leads you can you not rest in His leading?

    Ian I still have no idea what you mean by "walking in the Spirit". The fruits mentioned above are in fact lived outwardly by the believer that in fact does what he can to live God's law. If the law is not used by you then it is in fact disgarded. By pointing us to Christ I believe the Spirit points us to His righteousness. Now I must ask you ... What does it mean to be conformed to the likeness of Christ? If Christ is our righteousness and Christ is ALL righteousness to be conformed to Him is to be conformed to righteousness does it not? Not perfection mind you but an ever growing ability to "walk in the Spirit".

    Consider one of the fruits of the Spirit: love.

    This love is God-given love, true love. It is a love which loves Christ and His heavenly things. It is not a love which is set upon earthly, material things. It is not a love which ‘covets’ earthly goods and therefore breaks the 10th commandment. It will instinctively love that which is right, it will love God and our neighbour without the need for a “thou shalt not” to keep it in check.

    You say “The fruits mentioned above are in fact lived outwardly by the believer that in fact does what he can to live God's law”. Do you think that such love needs to be guided by a “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house…”? Does not such love brought forth as a fruit of the Spirit instinctively love Christ and His things, and does not covet one’s neighbour’s things?

    Is it better to set before a believer in whom the Spirit is bringing forth such fruit the object of his love, Christ, or a “thou shalt not covet” from the law?

    The Spirit does not need to be directed by the law – His fruit will automatically lead to a fulfilment of it when Christ is preached without such outward ‘hedging in’. This is why Paul writes with respect to the fruit of the Spirit in Galatians 5:23: “against such there is no law”. You simply don’t place a “Thou shalt not covet” alongside the fruit of the Spirit – love. “If ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law”.

    “But we still have the flesh”, someone objects. Yes, and the flesh hasn’t changed, it is as sinful as ever. And the result from the flesh when it is instructed by the law is just the same as it ever was (whether in a believer or unbeliever):-

    “… but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died” Romans 7:9.

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

    “But our serving in the newness of the spirit must be by using the law”, one objects. It is ‘directed’ by the law. Why?

    Why does love, a fruit of the Spirit, need to be instructed “Thou shalt not covet” when it just wouldn’t anyway? Why does it need to be told “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God” when that is EXACTLY what such love does by nature anyway? A sinner doesn’t need to be taught to sin, so why would the fruit of the Spirit need to be taught to do right?

    The reality is that such commands will only end up addressing the flesh and rather than instruct the flesh, and keep it in check, they will actually cause sin to be revived in the flesh. Rather than the law being kept it will be broken.

    But if one ‘starves’ the flesh by giving it no occasion to sin, by setting Christ always before the eyes of faith then the fruit of the Spirit will flourish in the believer – love and faith will be drawn out to Christ and one will walk in the Spirit, not in the flesh. And thus Christ will be formed in us and seen to be in us as fruit is brought forth.

    By all means read the law, all of it, to see Christ (which is what I do - hence I in no way disregard it). When you read “thou shalt not covet” praise God that Christ has fulfilled that law perfectly, which we only broke, that God imputes to us a righteousness which we could never attain to, and that God has freely forgiven us for all of our transgressions of that law, through grace and mercy. But just don’t set it before your eyes as some rule which you hope to live by as you will only fail. The Spirit and His fruit need no direction from those commands, and the flesh will only be stirred up by them to sin more.

    Our walk is in the new creature, born again of the Spirit, bringing forth fruit of the Spirit, “love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperarance: against such there is no law” Galatians 5:22-23. This is the RULE spoken of in Galatians 6:16 “And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.” This scripture actually states “walk according to this rule” so THIS is the rule by which we walk, is it not?

    “But God forbid that I should glory save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world” Galatians 6:14.

    I couldn’t agree with you more. The Spirit doesn’t work in or through a vacuum … Thanks for admitting that. Although I am not sure what you mean by “what applies to whom.”??

    Actually it wasn’t an admission Jan – it was a statement of truth because I do love all of God’s word as it all points me to Christ. But I am not under the law as my rule of life. As Eileen rightly said – I am under Christ, my King. As to ‘what applies to whom’ I simply meant that the Old Covenant in its external sense applied to the nation of Israel. Not to us. It points in type and figure to Christ through whom the New Covenant is brought in, which fulfils all the types and figures of the Old. It is the New Covenant we are under, not the Old. The Old spoke of what God demanded from men. But the New Covenant is entirely about what God has done and does do for His people. It speaks of Christ and His finished work for us. And the application of that work in our lives by the Spirit who brings forth fruit. Against which there is no law.

    In Grace,
    Ian
    "For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ" John 1:17

    www.graceandtruthonline.com

  5. #205
    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 GraceAmbassador
    Problems with double negatives! Perhaps you can blame it on me being a foreigner...I REALLY, DEEPLY, SORROWFULLY AND SHAMEFULLY APOLOGIZE for coming appearing that I meant the opposite!
    Milt, all is well, my dear brother. Thanks for being so consciencious. See ya later.

    ...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)

  6. #206
    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 Ian Potts
    Because the law when one reads it in scripture IS external to us. You aren’t reading ‘what is written upon your heart’ - you are reading what is outside of yourself on the pages of the Bible.


    Ian, I agree with and like much of what you write, in terms of that the Spirit operates in the lives of His people, and the way we, as believers, look to Christ and to trust in His finished work, and rely totally on the grace of God for righteous living. Nonetheless, and perhaps without you realizing it, much of your discussion is based on question-begging arguments.

    For example, you're assuming that the law "written on the heart" is somehow different than the one written in the pages of Scripture. If the law written on our hearts is the same as the one written on the pages of Scripture, then why is one "bad" and the other "good", as you seem to imply? Why would something that is on a piece of paper and written in ink be a "bad thing"?

    Or, on the other hand, if the law written on the heart is different than the one written on the pages of Scripture, then why would God have a double standard or change his mind; this would contradict His own direct statement to the contrary. In this sense, your whole approach really reduces to a form of "natural law" ethics. But I've already argued against this approach in a previous post and have shown how it is unbiblical and philophically defenseless. Among other criticisms, it denies the universality of the law of God, it eliminates the believer from having a "thus saith the Lord" written answer to ethical questions, and fails to properly recognize the noetic effects of sin.

    Secondly, I think part of the difficulty that I see with adherers of NCT is a misunderstanding of what it means for the law to be "written on the heart". The assumption appears to be that if a law is written on a heart, then it must be different in some way. But this, I believe, is mistaken. What's different in the new covenant age is the way in which God's people are able to RESPOND to the law. In the old covenant you had people who repeatedly broke God's law; because at that time, the Holy Spirit was available in only a provisional way, whereas since Pentecost, the Spirit is given in its fullness by the finished work of Jesus. Consider a couple of well known passages:

    Jer. 31:31 - "Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah-- 32not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the LORD. 33But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

    The thing about this passage is that the new covenant will bring about a change in POWER, not a change in the LAW. With the pouring out of the Holy Spirit the ability of God's people in the new covenant age to live righteously would be radically changed. We see this, for example, by the contrast between the breaking of the covenant in vs. 32 and the writing of the law on the heart and mind. This contrast shows us a difference in power in terms of ABILITY. However, NOWHERE in this passage do we see that the law itself will be DIFFERENT. Please notice this. In the old covenant, the law, although righteous and holy and good and just, etc. was solely external, since men had only a provisional giving of the Spirit, and not its fullness as we have since Pentecost. That's why they couldn't keep it, and that's why the law was a minister of death and curse. But with the coming of Spirit comes a change in God's people to live righteously and in accordance to God's moral requirements.

    A somewhat parallel passage to this point may be found in Ezek. 36:16-38. The immediate context of this passage is in the restoration of Israel during her Babylonian captivity, but I believe the greater fulfillment applies to the new covenant age. While the entire passage is worth reading, I quote only the relevant portion:

    Ezek. 36:26,27 - I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them.

    The key point to notice here, I think, is the issue of men's hearts. In the bible, the heart refers to man's ethical or moral or personal center; out of which flows the issues of life (e.g. Deut. 9:5; 15:9; Ps. 10:3; 28:3; etc.) What will change with men is that God will recreate in them a new ethical nature, and this new ethical nature will produce obedience to God's law. In vs. 27, God's Spirit will CAUSE people to walk in His statutes. But having a new ethical ability does not in any way change the relevance and universality of the law itself.

    So, yeah, we might summarize by saying that the new covenant surpasses the old covenant in power and glory, with respect to man's superior ethical abilities as a result of the outpouring of the fullness of the Spirit, but not in type or essence of the covenant of grace and certainly not in the law of God, which defines God's righteous requirements and which is unalterable and universal, as I've already illustrated countless times in previous posts.

    On another front, it's also important to notice in all of this that it's not the external LAW that's bad, it's men's hearts. If the law is good and holy and just and righteous and pure, then why WOULDN'T someone want to follow it? To say that the law has been internalized doesn't mean that it's been removed from relevance or as our guide. It only means that our ability to keep it has been radically improved by the work of the Spirit. And, no, this does NOT in any way entail legalistic self-effort. If nothing else, I hope this misunderstanding has been cleared up.

    Indeed, if someone were to argue that the law is internal, and that therefore we shouldn't look to anything external, then why couldn't someone simply apply this type of silly reasoning to its logical conclusion and just say that we don't even need the BIBLE itself anymore? After all, if the Holy Spirit guides us into "ALL TRUTH", and if everything has been "internalized" then why do we even need ANYTHING in written form? No, it's because of the deceitfulness of men's hearts that inscripturated revelation was necessary. Similarly, because of the noetic effects of sin, we need the REVEALED Law of God in the bible to guard and correct ourselves from our own self deception and our tendency to distort and pervert it. Yes, we are Spirit lead, and we rely on the Spirit to produce fruit and obedience and a heart that loves the Lord. But, while justification is instantaneous, the Spirit produces death to sin in us and superior obedience, but over time and as we make use of the means of grace; but even there, our glorified ethical state can't be achieved in this life. Since we will never be sinless in this life, we need written revelation, including the written law of God.

    I know I didn't address everything, but hopefully this clears up a few areas.

    I'm gone...

    ...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. #207
    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 Ian Potts
    By all means read the law, all of it, to see Christ (which is what I do - hence I in no way disregard it).
    That's not entirely correct. Let me give a hypothetical to illustate a point. If God had chosen only to reveal in the OT, let's say, the 10 commandments along with all the case law applications of them, but not anything of the sort like what we see in Leviticus 16 or the other redemption-defining provisions in the OT, then you would NOT have had sufficient knowledge of how to be made right with God. You would have a lot of moral requirements that God lays down for people, but nothing that would illustrate how one can be redeemed from breaking those moral requirements. Sure, the moral requirements would have shown men their guilt before God, since all would break them. But to say that all laws in the OT are of the same TYPE is simply bizzare. Laws such as these don't point to Christ or anything else; they only illustrate God's moral requirements:

    Deut. 6:5 - You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength.

    Deut. 22:1 - You shall not see your brother's ox or his sheep going astray, and hide yourself from them; you shall certainly bring them back to your brother.

    Deut. 24:7 - If a man is found kidnapping any of his brethren of the children of Israel, and mistreats him or sells him, then that kidnapper shall die; and you shall put away the evil from among you.


    These laws and others like them simply do not point to Christ and, therefore, cannot be seen as types or foreshadows. They are not redemption defining, but rather, are justice and righteousness defining. To say that these laws point to Christ in a redemption defining sense is, I believe, simply to read a preconceived view into them. The distinction of the law of God into types is simply unavoidable and is necessary to understand the bible correctly.

    ...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. #208
    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..

    BK
    These laws and others like them simply do not point to Christ and, therefore, cannot be seen as types or foreshadows. They are not redemption defining, but rather, are justice and righteousness defining.

    To say that a law is justice and righteousness defining is by no means to say that it does not point to Christ. The Life of Christ and especially the Cross is a cosmic melding of God’s justice and his redemption.

    3:21But now apart from the law, a righteousness of God has been revealed, being testified by the law and the prophets; 3:22even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ to all and on all those who believe. For there is no distinction, 3:23for all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God; 3:24being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus; 3:25whom God set forth to be an atoning sacrifice, through faith in his blood, for a demonstration of his righteousness through the passing over of prior sins, in God's forbearance; 3:26to demonstrate his righteousness at this present time; that he might himself be just, and the justifier of him who has faith in Jesus.

  9. #209
    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 Ian Potts
    But if you say that it is written upon your heart as a work of the Spirit, and the Spirit leads you can you not rest in His leading?
    If I was without sin sure I could but I fear to say that my sinful self could actually be deceitful in how I justify my behavior. Without God's written word to go to I could really mess around with right and wrong, what is loving and what is the best way to react or act in any given situation. I could in fact be doing something against the leading of the Spirit and think I was being lead to do this thing. (i.e.) my examples given previously.

    I think BK really hit it hard ... Our hearts are in fact deceitful and it is the human heart not the law itself that is bad. Without some concrete standard My defination of "love" could be just as right as your defination of "love" and we could be on completely different realms of what God considers the "loving" action to be.

    To "rest in the leading" of the Holy Spirit has lead to many errors (IMHO) I grew up as a "Mormon" and they believe they are "led" by the Holy Spirit. I am sure the other fringe cults believe they are "led by the Holy Spirit". In fact I don't believe that anyone has been lead by the Holy Spirit into perfection while here on earth. So it seems to be a very VAGUE and somewhat dangerous outlook.
    Quote Originally Posted by LoverofLiberty
    Since we will never be sinless in this life, we need written revelation, including the written law of God.
    My congradulations on stating in one simple sentence what I have tried to argue for several posts.

    I am still looking for the answer to this question ....
    What does it mean to be conformed to the likeness of Christ?

    Thanks for the replies to everyone that has participated ... having started out on this venture not really understanding what a theonomist was, I believe I would have no problem now being labeled one and wear the badge without shame.

    out for now .... Jan
    It is what it is

  10. #210
    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 ornery BK....hehehe, right back to you

    Here's the deal....I will answer your post in a week. I know how I would answer the questions however I haven't studied theonomy on any basis actually so I will dialouge with you after some study on this issue cause we sure wouldn't want it to just be a one sided conversation now, would we?? Now a week isn't much time I know to study such an issue but hey....better than no time!!

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

  11. #211
    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 tomas1
    To say that a law is justice and righteousness defining is by no means to say that it does not point to Christ.
    Well, if you mean by this statement that it testifies of God's attibutes of justice, righteousness, etc., and therefore by extension, also the attributes of Christ in his divine nature, then fine. But, T, you know very well what I was talking about in my original statement. It's why I tried to make a contrast between what is clearly a moral command like, "You shall not see your brother's ox or his sheep going astray, and hide yourself from them; you shall certainly bring them back to your brother" versus those commands that define how one is to be redeemed for breaking a moral command, something like what we see in Leviticus 16:

    Lev. 16:3ff - Thus Aaron shall come into the Holy Place: with the blood of a young bull as a sin offering, and of a ram as a burnt offering...And he shall take from the congregation of the children of Israel two kids of the goats as a sin offering, and one ram as a burnt offering. "Aaron shall offer the bull as a sin offering, which is for himself, and make atonement for himself and for his house. He shall take the two goats and present them before the LORD at the door of the tabernacle of meeting. Then Aaron shall cast lots for the two goats: one lot for the LORD and the other lot for the scapegoat. And Aaron shall bring the goat on which the LORD's lot fell, and offer it as a sin offering, etc...


    Quote Originally Posted by tomas1
    The Life of Christ and especially the Cross is a cosmic melding of God’s justice and his redemption.
    Sorry, T, but the examples of moral commands I cited previously say nothing whatsoever about redemption. They say something about the justice and righteousness of God, and that there is big trouble for breaking them, but they don't say anything about redemption. To use a very very loose analogy, your claim would be like a father telling his child to do his homework every day before going out to play, and then saying that this command also shows the child how he can regain his father's favor for not doing it. It shows what's required and it shows that punishment awaits if the child disobeys, but it says nothing about reconciliation issues. T, I love reading your many excellent insights, but I honestly think you're reading a preconceived idea into all this. And, too, I really don't understand why you or anyone else would have a problem with me distinguishing the law of God by category or function. Plus, I've already explained that when we see in the NT some sort of change in the law, we go with it. But think of the alternative, if Adam hadn't fallen into sin, what sense would it make for God to require the killing of an animal, and that such a command would be in the same functional category of "thou shalt not kill"?


    Quote Originally Posted by tomas1
    Rom. 3:21-26 - But now apart from the law, a righteousness of God has been revealed being testified by the law and the prophets; 3:22even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ to all and on all those who believe. For there is no distinction, 3:23for all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God; 3:24being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus; 3:25whom God set forth to be an atoning sacrifice, through faith in his blood, for a demonstration of his righteousness through the passing over of prior sins, in God's forbearance; 3:26to demonstrate his righteousness at this present time; that he might himself be just, and the justifier of him who has faith in Jesus.
    T, this passage is simply talking about the doctrine of justification by faith in Christ alone. It's saying here that justification is by faith apart from the works of the law; justification is not by our own acts of obedience. We are not justified by our autonomous efforts to keep God's moral commands, nor are we required to trust Christ by faith AND keep the Jewish ceremonies, which was the Judiazer heresy and, which, therefore ends up nullifying the grace of God. Salvation and right standing before God is either ALL by grace or not at all. That, I think, is the essence of this passage. I can give more detail if you like. But unless I'm missing something, I don't really see how this passage has anything to do with what I was talking about in my last post. This Romans 3 passage is talking about justification, whereas I was only maintaining that one can categorize the law of God by function. Even in the OT, justification was still by faith alone, not by works or anything else that someone might want to contribute to that faith.

    I'm gone...

    ...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)

  12. #212
    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..

    Jan,

    Heidelberg question #1

    What is thy only comfort in life and in death?

    That I with body and soul, both in life and in death, am not my own but belong to my faithful Savior Jesus Christ, who with His precious blood has fully satisfied for all my sins and redeemed me from all the power of the devil and so preserves me that without the will of my Father in heaven not a hair can fall from my head, indeed, that all things must work together for my salvation. Wherefore, by His Holy Spirit, He also assures me of eternal life, and makes me heartily willing and ready from now on to live unto Him.

    Psalm 23

    The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.

    He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.

    He restoreth my soul: He leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for His name's sake.

    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.

    Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou annointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over.

    Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the Lord forever.


    We differ somewhat Jan on the 'rule of life' and the 'leading of the Holy Spirit". When I said I was under the rule of the King, I truly meant that. I look to the King and I trust the leading of the comforter that He sent. That doesn't mean that I can't love the laws of the King for He gave them, but the laws do not have the rule over me and I don't rest in the law, I rest in the King. I rest in the Good Shepherd, for He will never let His sheep go astray. The Spirit bears witness with my spirit that I am a child of God, not the law.

    Oh yes, I love the law and I desire with all my being to be obedient but there is no rest in that, there is only rest in Christ. So I can rest in the Holy Spirit to guide and direct me while I sojurn here and you too can have comfort that the Lord will lead you in the path of righteousness for His name's sake.

    I went to bed but 'felt' burdened to encourage you in your rest.

    The Lord bless you dear sister.
    "To those who have no works-phobia, I will state that you are not trembling before the gospel" Robert R. Higby

  13. #213
    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..

    Interesting timing Eileen . I just returned from my Bible study and my pastor and I discussed some of these issues and I see where I have miscommunicated some of my intentions.

    I am a very weak debator but I have learned a great deal in dialoguing with everyone in this thread. I also am a terrible speller hahaha so I beg forgiveness in that area.

    I don't mean to come across as someone who doesn't in fact relish and cherish my rest in Christ. In defending my stance on Old and New testament continuity or the permanence of God's eternal law I feel that I may come across as someone who only looks to the law for my santification or better yet my peace with God.

    What a beautiful wonderful God we serve. A God who provides for us a means to be obedient. Who indwells those He loves and grants to them this ability to be obedient and love following His ways. Way TOO COOL!!!!!

    Anyways ... thanks for the encouragement and I appreciate your words to me.

    GOD BLESS you as well sis .... Jan
    It is what it is

  14. #214
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Honiton, Devon, England
    Posts
    102
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Quote Originally Posted by doctr of grace
    If I was without sin sure I could but I fear to say that my sinful self could actually be deceitful in how I justify my behavior. Without God's written word to go to I could really mess around with right and wrong, what is loving and what is the best way to react or act in any given situation. I could in fact be doing something against the leading of the Spirit and think I was being lead to do this thing. (i.e.) my examples given previously.
    Quote Originally Posted by doctr of grace

    Just one quick reply to this before I leave this topic. I have stated many times in this thread that I use ALL of the scriptures, so please don’t misinterpret my meaning when I stress one aspect, such as the fruit of the Spirit, as though I treat that in total isolation from scripture. Certainly the Spirit uses the written word to teach and guide us. I was simply illustrating the point that the fruit of the Spirit, love, needs no “Thou shalt not covet” to hedge it in. But a gracious exhortation from the New Testament such as “be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you” is very different – this is to sow to the new man of grace.

    One aspect of the Spirit’s teaching is to teach us to rightly divide the word, to understand the Old in the light of the New. If the Spirit has given us the law in the Old Testament but then tells us that we are no longer under it in the New, then we follow this New Testament teaching. You and BK agree with that – but you simply understand the New Testament teaching on the law differently to myself. You accept that we are no longer under the ceremonial aspects of the Levitical priesthood, animal sacrifices and so on, but that these things still teach us about Christ. I simply say that we are no longer under the law as a rule, but I still believe that what it says is true and points us to the fulfilled righteousness of Christ.

    With regard to the leading of the Spirit however I want to make this point. There is ONE Spirit and that Spirit WILL lead His people into truth and in a righteous pathway. He does not lead us to sin. Those who claim to be led of the Spirit and continue in sin are wrong.

    Likewise we know that we still have the flesh and it wars against the Spirit and will cause us to fall and sin. When we fall into such sin we will break the law. Romans 3:20 tells us that “by the law is the knowledge of sin”. So the law does objectively teach us what sin is and condemns the sin that we commit. However we know as believers that ultimately there is “now no condemnation” to us for Christ has already paid for those sins by His blood. But that aspect of the law in exposing the sins of our flesh, is as I have said before, negative. The law simply exposes sin. Just as its function in the unbeliever is to expose sin, so the law will expose the sin that the believer commits should he fall into it. But we don’t use the law in a POSITIVE sense in order to teach us how to walk positively in the Spirit. We look to Christ. We are led by the Spirit and He testifies of Christ – He draws out our love and faith towards Him.

    No, the law’s function is negative – to expose sin. You asked in a previous post whether it could have other uses, such as a rule of living. But the New Testament ANSWERS those questions. It tells us the use of the law. Galatians 3:19 says “Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come…”. “But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster” 3:25.

    The law has its use – it exposes sin – see 1 Timothy 1. It also stirs up sin and revives it in our flesh IN ORDER TO expose it, so the believer must be delivered from under its rule by the body of Christ in order to fulfil its demands. No, the believer is not under it, it is not his rule, it is not his motivation or his moral guide. The believer is under Christ, He looks to Christ by faith, He is led by the Spirit. His motivation is love and faith towards Christ. His positive guidance is found in Christ and His Gospel.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen
    We differ somewhat Jan on the 'rule of life' and the 'leading of the Holy Spirit". When I said I was under the rule of the King, I truly meant that. I look to the King and I trust the leading of the comforter that He sent. That doesn't mean that I can't love the laws of the King for He gave them, but the laws do not have the rule over me and I don't rest in the law, I rest in the King. I rest in the Good Shepherd, for He will never let His sheep go astray. The Spirit bears witness with my spirit that I am a child of God, not the law.

    Oh yes, I love the law and I desire with all my being to be obedient but there is no rest in that, there is only rest in Christ. So I can rest in the Holy Spirit to guide and direct me while I sojurn here and you too can have comfort that the Lord will lead you in the path of righteousness for His name's sake.

    I went to bed but 'felt' burdened to encourage you in your rest.

    The Lord bless you dear sister.

    Amen Eileen.
    "For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ" John 1:17

    www.graceandtruthonline.com

  15. #215
    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 Ian .... Thanks for your replies and I appreciate what you are saying. I agree with much of what you say and hope you realize that. Our difference lies in the way you and I perceive the "laws" and you have made it clear where that difference lies .... Thanks for helping me understand that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Potts
    The law simply exposes sin. Just as its function in the unbeliever is to expose sin, so the law will expose the sin that the believer commits should he fall into it. But we don’t use the law in a POSITIVE sense in order to teach us how to walk positively in the Spirit. We look to Christ. We are led by the Spirit and He testifies of Christ – He draws out our love and faith towards Him.
    I in fact see the law as something positive. Sure I must concur with you on the negative aspect of it. Yet, God in fact took the negative away for the believer when he justified me by and through the righteousness of Christ. I do read in not only the OT but the NT as well that God's commandments are for the betterment of His people. How is that negative? Jesus states if you love me you will keep my commandments. I dare say He is referring to God's eternal moral Laws. If the Holy Spirit is leading us as you say why would Jesus even need to make such a statement? Paul more than once corrects and admonishes the church when it falls into false ideas or teaching. Paul in fact uses the Law when correcting. You can't miss it. John in his first letter devotes an entire section (Chapter 2 comes to mind) to defining how a Christian is to live and of course there is that famous letter written by James.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Potts
    I simply say that we are no longer under the law as a rule, but I still believe that what it says is true and points us to the fulfilled righteousness of Christ.
    See I think you have either misunderstood me or I am not understanding what you think I mean by saying the "law" is my rule for life. It is a guideline, that is all. When you make statements like this it sorta gets my feathers ruffled (hahaha) I really don't have any feathers. I am blessed in so many ways and one of them is that God has brought to me a full understanding of the Gospel. A true understanding of my sinful self and therefore my desperate need for my Savior. Before understanding the "reformed" faith (for lack of a better term) I don't think I really had a clue about the true gospel message or the truth about who God is. Anyways I sorta get offended by your implication stated above. You are very cleverly suggesting that I am someone that doesn't believe in the imputed righteousness of Christ. If that isn't the case ... I apologize for thinking that way ... just letting you know how much it puts me on the defensive .

    Can the law only have ONE function? You seem to suggest this is the case while I seem to read within the Bible the law in fact is not so singular in its applications.

    Well ... I guess again some morning thoughts ... Hope is all is well for you across the pond.

    Out for now .... Jan
    It is what it is

  16. #216
    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..

    Actually Jan you are a great debator.....I don't know about you but it takes a great, great effort for me to put my own understanding into coherent thoughts for others to understand, that is what we usually go around and around about isn't it?? Trying hard to understand what the other is meaning by their words.

    It is so worth the effort.....I too have gleaned much from this thread and I have grown in Grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus. One more butt in on your posts with Ian.

    I can think of the negative of the law having a positive effect because the Spirit does use it to convict and show me my sin and in that regards I can run to God and:

    "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness"

    Just a quick thought as I too run off to work, have a great day all!
    "To those who have no works-phobia, I will state that you are not trembling before the gospel" Robert R. Higby

  17. #217
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Honiton, Devon, England
    Posts
    102
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Different Views..

    Quote Originally Posted by doctr of grace
    Hey Ian .... Thanks for your replies and I appreciate what you are saying. I agree with much of what you say and hope you realize that. Our difference lies in the way you and I perceive the "laws" and you have made it clear where that difference lies .... Thanks for helping me understand that.
    Quote Originally Posted by doctr of grace

    I in fact see the law as something positive. Sure I must concur with you on the negative aspect of it. Yet, God in fact took the negative away for the believer when he justified me by and through the righteousness of Christ. I do read in not only the OT but the NT as well that God's commandments are for the betterment of His people. How is that negative? Jesus states if you love me you will keep my commandments. I dare say He is referring to God's eternal moral Laws.

    Well… I think that would need to be shown Jan. What do other NT scriptures say? Does Jesus really mean the law there?

    Well, you may say, Jesus is God and God gave the law. Yes, but he also gave the laws regarding sacrifice, the priesthood and the temple to Israel. Does Jesus mean that we are still under those laws in that outward sense? Is He saying to observe them? No, he can’t be because other New Testament scriptures show clearly that that isn’t the case for NT believers. And likewise the New Testament teaches the same thing regarding the whole law eg. Romans 7:4 and 7:6. So as I have said umpteen times before we must interpret scripture by scripture.

    I have an article on my site on this topic which you can read. I won’t enter into further debate about any points arising from it as I’d like to leave this matter now, but you may like to read it anyway:

    http://www.ipotts.freeserve.co.uk/ianp6.html

    See I think you have either misunderstood me or I am not understanding what you think I mean by saying the "law" is my rule for life. It is a guideline, that is all. When you make statements like this it sorta gets my feathers ruffled (hahaha) I really don't have any feathers. I am blessed in so many ways and one of them is that God has brought to me a full understanding of the Gospel. A true understanding of my sinful self and therefore my desperate need for my Savior. Before understanding the "reformed" faith (for lack of a better term) I don't think I really had a clue about the true gospel message or the truth about who God is. Anyways I sorta get offended by your implication stated above. You are very cleverly suggesting that I am someone that doesn't believe in the imputed righteousness of Christ. If that isn't the case ... I apologize for thinking that way ... just letting you know how much it puts me on the defensive .

    Sorry Jan, but I’m afraid you really have got over-defensive here. No I was not ‘cleverly’ suggesting anything of the sort (…not sure I’m that clever anyway)! I fully accept that you too believe in imputed righteousness. I wasn’t stating that I see those things in the law to imply that you DON’T, but merely to show that those are the things I see in the law, hence I still find it useful and don’t disregard it. It points me to Christ. You may ALSO see it as being your rule of life. But I was simply trying to show that because I don’t regard the believer to be under it as a rule of life, does not mean that I disregard it as though it might as well not be in the scriptures.

    Can the law only have ONE function? You seem to suggest this is the case while I seem to read within the Bible the law in fact is not so singular in its applications.

    There is more than 'one' function (eg. it points to Christ, shows God's holiness, justice and goodness - but nothing like that revelation of the righteousness of God seen in Christ in the Gospel, Romans 1:17, Hebrews 1:3 - and exposes our sin). But all I’d say here is let’s not get into conjecture. We have both defended the use of ALL the scriptures, so that should be what guides us with respect to what the correct functions of the law are. I have quoted some NT scriptures regarding its use. If you’d like to quote some others which clearly say that it is a rule of life for the believer then feel free. But here is some of what I can find as explicit scriptures regarding the use of the law, which demonstrate how it is holy, just and good, but how we are sinful in our flesh and how it therefore exposes and condemns the sin in our flesh…

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


    Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:”
    Romans 5:20

    “For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.” Romans 6:14

    “For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.” Romans 7:5

    “What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
    But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.

    For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
    And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
    For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
    Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
    Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

    Romans 7:7-13

    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:
    That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.”

    Romans 8:3-4

    “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:”
    2 Corinthians 3:6-12

    He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?” Galatians 3:5

    “And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.” Galatians 3:12

    Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
    20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.
    21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
    22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
    23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
    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.” Galatians 3:19-25


    Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
    22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
    23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
    24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
    25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
    26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
    27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.
    28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
    29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
    30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
    31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.” Galatians 4:21-31

    Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
    16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:”
    Ephesians 2:15-16

    “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;” Colossians 2:14

    “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,
    10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
    11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.”

    1 Timothy 1:8-11

    “But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
    7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
    8 For finding fault with them, 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:
    9 Not 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.
    10 For 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:
    11 And 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.
    12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
    13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.”
    Hebrews 8:6-13

    And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.”
    1 John 3:23


    Well ... I guess again some morning thoughts ... Hope is all is well for you across the pond.

    Out for now .... Jan

    Things are fine over here thanks Jan!

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts Jan – I have enjoyed our discussion on this matter, but will leave it here if you don’t mind. May the Lord lead us all into all His truth regarding His precious salvation of sinners through Jesus Christ. May we know Christ to be ALL and in ALL.



    In Grace,
    Ian
    "For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ" John 1:17

    www.graceandtruthonline.com

  18. #218
    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..

    Thanks Ian ... Appreciate your words and thoughts I will look over the article you have linked.

    I guess there really isn't much else to say about this ... I believe this thread is shortly running to it's end. I guess it is up to BK, tomas, eileen and any others if they want to continue discussing this issue.

    Take Care and May the Lord continue to Bless you in a mighty way....Jan
    It is what it is

  19. #219
    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 Eileen
    Ok ornery BK....hehehe, right back to you
    What?!?!?!?? Me, ornery? No way....grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr...


    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen
    Here's the deal....I will answer your post in a week. I know how I would answer the questions however I haven't studied theonomy on any basis actually so I will dialouge with you after some study on this issue cause we sure wouldn't want it to just be a one sided conversation now, would we??
    No problem, Eileen. Take all the time you want. And please don't think that I'm trying to trick you or play mind games with you. That's not my goal. My goal in here has always been to try to explain the theonomic view and separate fact from fiction, and then to force people to think critically about the issue at hand. Asking relevant questions, sorta like the one I asked you, is a good way to do that, I think. Maybe it's the teacher in me or something. Another thing, too, if you're honestly going to evaluate this system, I would recommend that you actually listen to a leading proponent of the system. I would recommend Greg Bahnsen on this topic, since he's the one that was most responsible for causing the stir in the evangelical community back in the 70's. And, too, I think his is the clearest exposition of the view. You can get study cassette tapes or MP3's of his material from this web site:

    www.cmfnow.com

    Go into the site and look for Greg Bahnsen's stuff on "ethics". His "basic training" stuff is good for laypeople, but so are virtually all of his tape series on the subject. His material on apologetics is really good, too. Most of the tape series were given at conferences. Then if you like you can get into further study on the subject by listening to material that was given in college lectures or as a Seminary level course on Christian ethics. Or if you prefer written material, I would suggest Bahnsen's book "By This Standard" which is written for laypeople like us and is easy to follow than the more technical "Theonomy in Chritian Ethics". You can order it from the same website.

    Then if you also want to listen to criticisms of the view then that's perfectly good, too, but at least you'll have a clear understanding of what the view entails and what it doesn't. I hope you'll trust me when I tell you that many of the critics, most of whom should know better, have maligned and misrepresented and misunderstood the theonomic ethic perhaps more than any aspect of systematic theology. My only hope is that you won't formulate your opinion from a critic of the system without listening to or reading source material. Otherwise, you won't know if it's the actual view that's being knocked down or a straw man.

    And, yeah, as far as the questions, I can wait on those. Or if you'd rather, I could just give my own answer to it here in the forum, in the event that you don't like being put on the spot. Anyway, let me know. You are an encouragement to me.

    ...peace out (in a non-ornery way)

    ...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)

  20. #220
    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
    (1) If someone is unregenerate and engages in the act of shoplifting but then becomes a Christian during the period of due process, should he be absolved and forgiven of his crime, since He is now totally and completely forgiven in God's sight?

    (2) Should a Christian who received a speeding ticket be allowed to plead innocent before the court, using as his defense the fact that he has been redeemed by the blood of Christ and, therefore, declared "not guilty" of all sin and wrongdoing?
    My answer to #1 is NO
    My answer to #2 is NO

    I am assuming this person lives in the good ole USA. If this is the case then the LAW is indeed King and this person no matter what their standing is before God has committed crimes and is guilty in the sight of the society in which they live. Therefore, in order for justice to prevail their crimes should be paid for according to the penal code of where this person lives.

    BK ... I am sure my response doesn't surprise you .... I am hoping some NCT'er types will chime in on this exercise.

    Out of here til next time .... Jan
    It is what it is

Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 11 ... 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
  •