Is the Jewish God and gentile God the same?

[Grandpa]

Its like how God sees us today.

Even though we have unbelief, we know the good we should do but we don't, we don't love God with all our hearts/mind/soul, we don't love our neighbors as ourselves, in short, we are habitually sinning all the time, without even knowing it.

Yet, God sees us as righteous and following all his laws. Why? Because he sees us covered by Jesus's robe of righteousness. That is what not living under law, and under grace means.

There is an illustration of that with the prophet Balaam in the book of Numbers 23:21.

I understand imputed righteousness. But the way I see it is apart from the law. I don't see God saying we obey if we don't obey.

Romans 3:21-22
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:


This is something I haven't really been able to wrap my mind around yet. Because I see Abraham the same way you do.

And yet... God has proclaimed Abraham as obeying His Law and statutes. So its not something I can really explain. Just question.

 

[Guojing]

I understand imputed righteousness. But the way I see it is apart from the law. I don't see God saying we obey if we don't obey.

This is something I haven't really been able to wrap my mind around yet. Because I see Abraham the same way you do.

And yet... God has proclaimed Abraham as obeying His Law and statutes. So its not something I can really explain. Just question.

But Christians have no problems telling non-Christians, "No matter what good deeds you do, God still sees you as a sinner. Why, because of Adam's sin!"

It seems we have little problem understanding imputed sin, but we have some difficulty understanding imputed righteousness, even though Romans 5:12-19 made it pretty clear that it is not our disobedience, but Adam's, and likewise for obedience.

 

[PS]

Are you saying that the law written in our hearts is an entirely different law than the law God told of on the tablets? If that was so God would write plainly "you may steal I take it back", etc on down the line of the commandments. God didn't do that, and today's church should not do that either. It is not of God but of demons.

The Ten Commandments written on tablets of stone were given to Moses by God.

The 613 Mitzvot laws that were written on parchment by scribes, commonly spoken of as "The Law" that includes death by stoning etc. are not of God.

What you say in red is entirely correct and I feel everyone needs to know this. May God bless you.

 

[PS]

I am also saying that the blood that cleans can only come from one source, if you refute that there is a LOT of explaining to do. Why would David speak of salvation years before Christ?

Job_13:16 He also shall be my salvation: for an hypocrite shall not come before him.
Psa_3:8 Salvation belongeth unto the LORD: thy blessing is upon thy people. Selah.

You are correct and I was not saying otherwise, I am sorry if I offended you. I thought it would be nice to have a deeper understanding of the wonderful way God made for us by which means we can enter into His presence.

 

[PS]

That is precisely my point, Abraham was not under Law at any point in his life. If he is not under Law, he is blessed and justified only because of God's grace.

That is correct, perhaps you should have been clearer.

 

[Guojing]

That is correct, perhaps you should have been clearer.

You quoted my post to grandpa with my words "Isn't it much easier to conclude that he was not under the Law of Moses? "

 

[PS]

You quoted my post to grandpa with my words "Isn't it much easier to conclude that he was not under the Law of Moses? "

It depends what you mean by the Mosaic Law. This is frequently understood to be the 613 Mitzvot Laws, while the Ten Commandments given to Moses are God's Law.

As it happens Abraham was living 600+ years before Moses, so he was not under any law and therefore had not sinned under the law.

Added, I need to think about the Noahide law.

 

[PS]

You quoted my post to grandpa with my words "Isn't it much easier to conclude that he was not under the Law of Moses? "

OK. So I have had a look at my notes. Noah was born 3836 B.C. and Abraham was born 2164 B.C. So Noah was born 1690 years before Abraham, so Abraham would have come under the Noahide Law that prohibited Idolatry; Murder; Theft; Sexual immorality; Blasphemy; and the eating flesh taken from animals while still alive.

So Abraham may have been guilty of sexual immorality, but we have to remember it was the custom to take your brothers wife to yourself. So now there are other things to consider, but as Abraham was blessed of God, I think that closes the debate, what do you think?

 

[GodsGrace101]

Christ told us they were the same, although it wasn’t until Paul was assigned as the gentile apostle that God was accepted as God of all men.

Today many think the OT did not portray God accurately but Christ changed God. They use the word fulfilled to justify that. I believe the word fulfilled in bible meaning tells us that Christ was from the beginning, Christ was explained all through the OT, and Christ as He acted in our kind of time did, or fulfilled, all that was told of Him.

An example of the change often taught was grace as of the NT, law of the OT. Yet even Abraham shows us God's grace, as Abraham's faith was accounted as righteousness. The blessings given at the covenant at Mt. Sinai never included salvation, that was only by grace.

There was a group of people told of in Acts who believed God was eternal, the same always. They believed as I do that the OT often gives us a more complete picture of what the NT teaches, but there is never a disagreement between the two.

Acts 17: 11 the Bereans were more noble-minded than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if these teachings were true. 12As a result, many of them believed, along with quite a few prominent Greek women and men.…

Very good thread Blik.
I agree with all you've said.
Even the meaning of fulfilled....as many take this to mean that Jesus did everything for us, as in fulfilled an obligation; but, as you've stated it means to fulfill prophecy, to complete, to bring to a finish.

Your very first paragraph could be discussed a bit...
God was always the God of all men, Romans 1:19-20,
however, I do understand how you mean this and it's also correct.

Grace was also in the O.T. God's grace was always available to us -- how else to follow in His ways?
The law is still present -- but only the moral law. Of course, the civil and ceremonial law cannot be fulfilled nor is it necessary to.

I don't understand the following, which I highlighted in blue above:

The blessings given at the covenant at Mt. Sinai never included salvation, that was only by grace.

You can't mean what it sounds like. Abraham was saved.
Many in the O.T. were saved....
Could you explain?

 

[Guojing]

It depends what you mean by the Mosaic Law. This is frequently understood to be the 613 Mitzvot Laws, while the Ten Commandments given to Moses are God's Law.

As it happens Abraham was living 600+ years before Moses, so he was not under any law and therefore had not sinned under the law.

Added, I need to think about the Noahide law.

Okay, I have met a few who distinguished between the Law of Moses and the Law of God. To them, the former is basically ceremonial law while the Law of God are "moral laws", and they further claim that Christians are only released from the former but not the latter.

Is that also your view?

 

[PS]

Okay, I have met a few who distinguished between the Law of Moses and the Law of God. To them, the former is basically ceremonial law while the Law of God are "moral laws", and they further claim that Christians are only released from the former but not the latter.

Is that also your view?

Yes, that is my view. I totally reject the Mosaic Law that was so loved by the scribes and Pharisees. It only applied to the Jews whereas the law of God is for all people.

 

[Guojing]

Yes, that is my view. I totally reject the Mosaic Law that was so loved by the scribes and Pharisees. It only applied to the Jews whereas the law of God is for all people.

Well, the problem with this distinction is that Paul does not separate it like some people do. Whenever he talks about the Law in his letters, it is understood to be a composite whole, that means ALL the laws, ceremonial, moral, whatever you name it.

He made it especially clear in the following 2 verses that he is also including the 10 commandments, into the Law that we have died to.

Romans 7:7 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.

2 Cor 3:7 7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious,

 

[PS]

Well, the problem with this distinction is that Paul does not separate it like some people do. Whenever he talks about the Law in his letters, it is understood to be a composite whole, that means ALL the laws, ceremonial, moral, whatever you name it.

He made it especially clear in the following 2 verses that he is also including the 10 commandments, into the Law that we have died to.

Romans 7:7 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.

2 Cor 3:7 7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious,

In Romans chapter 7 the apostle Paul is saying what we all know, which is that the law condemns, Mosaic Law particularly. Paul ends the chapter by saying, and I am going to take this from the Summarised Bible:- "Who shall deliver us? Jesus Christ is the all-sufficient Saviour and Friend, who has not only purchased our deliverance, but is our advocate in Heaven, through Whom we may be made victorious."

This we all know. The law condemns. So what do we do? We turn away from the law and we turn to Jesus Christ in repentance. Then, even the scribes and Pharisees who are locked into the death knell of the law will be saved. There is life in the risen Lord.

It says the same in 2 Cor 7-10. Here it is in the ERV.

(7) The old agreement that brought death, written with words on stone, came with God's glory. In fact, the face of Moses was so bright with glory (a glory that was ending) that the people of Israel could not continue looking at his face.
(8) So surely the new agreement that comes from the life-giving Spirit has even more glory.
(9) This is what I mean: That old agreement judged people guilty of sin, but it had glory. So surely the new agreement that makes people right with God has much greater glory.
(10) That old agreement had glory. But it really loses its glory when it is compared to the much greater glory of the new agreement.

 

[Dino246]

In any reasonable discussion the parties may ask if they understand correctly. I often do this.

In any reasonable discussion, people don't take what others said and go on wild, unsubstantiated tangents with it. You often do this. You've done it to me more than once, and I've observed you doing it to others. You can take the correction, or you can ignore it, as you choose.

 

[Blik]

Yes. It is an entirely different law.

Before the 10 commandments were even written we have God stating that Abraham kept His statutes and His Laws.

You think it is "Do not steal" that is written on our hearts by God?? No, of course not. It is Love that is written on our hearts by God Himself.

It depends what you mean by the Mosaic Law. This is frequently understood to be the 613 Mitzvot Laws, while the Ten Commandments given to Moses are God's Law.

As it happens Abraham was living 600+ years before Moses, so he was not under any law and therefore had not sinned under the law.

Added, I need to think about the Noahide law.

It seems to me that there is a major misunderstanding about God's words "under the law".

It is simply that there is only one way to righteousness and that is through Christ. In the OT they were told that it was only through blood, and reading about the sacrificial system in fascinating. When God tells of this blood, God is referring to the blood of Christ for this is and always has been the only way. That is what saved by the blood means. The steps are clear, it is through meaningful prayer putting our sins before Christ for forgiveness, and repenting. This was true from creation, as we are told through the story of Cain and Abel.

There are people who feel they can live without the blood of Christ, always has been. In order to live in this world or the next it is necessary to follow the law. People without Christ are under the law to live.

I don't think you can say that Abraham, or anyone human is not under this way that God is and the world is.

 

[Blik]

In any reasonable discussion, people don't take what others said and go on wild, unsubstantiated tangents with it. You often do this. You've done it to me more than once, and I've observed you doing it to others. You can take the correction, or you can ignore it, as you choose.

If you think I am going wild, tell me so. I do not think I have a right to distort the word of God, I am trying with all God gives me, to only report God's ways. I personally am nothing, God is everything. If I distort God I need to have that distortion corrected. That is true of all our postings.

 

[PS]

It seems to me that there is a major misunderstanding about God's words "under the law".

It is simply that there is only one way to righteousness and that is through Christ. In the OT they were told that it was only through blood, and reading about the sacrificial system in fascinating. When God tells of this blood, God is referring to the blood of Christ for this is and always has been the only way. That is what saved by the blood means. The steps are clear, it is through meaningful prayer putting our sins before Christ for forgiveness, and repenting. This was true from creation, as we are told through the story of Cain and Abel.

There are people who feel they can live without the blood of Christ, always has been. In order to live in this world or the next it is necessary to follow the law. People without Christ are under the law to live.

I don't think you can say that Abraham, or anyone human is not under this way that God is and the world is.

The law does not cleanse from sin. The blood of animals does not cleanse us from sin. Good works do not cleanse from sin. Nothing we do can cleanse us from sin. The Old Testament patriarchs were saved by faith, but for us, it is the blood of Jesus Christ that cleanses from all sin.

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. (Eph 2:8)

But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. (Eph 2:13)

But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. (1 Jn 1:7)

 

[Dino246]

If you think I am going wild, tell me so. I do not think I have a right to distort the word of God, I am trying with all God gives me, to only report God's ways. I personally am nothing, God is everything. If I distort God I need to have that distortion corrected. That is true of all our postings.

This is a perfect example of the problem.

I said "take what others said and go on wild, unsubstantiated tangents with it".

You said, "going wild".

What you said means something completely different than what I said. I said nothing about you "going wild". It's as if you don't read carefully; you just scan and shoot.

 

[Blik]

This is a perfect example of the problem.

I said "take what others said and go on wild, unsubstantiated tangents with it".

You said, "going wild".

What you said means something completely different than what I said. I said nothing about you "going wild". It's as if you don't read carefully; you just scan and shoot.

A copy of your words: "what others said and go on wild, unsubstantiated tangents". In light of your latest post I will consider you impossible to speak with.

 

[Dino246]

A copy of your words: "what others said and go on wild, unsubstantiated tangents". In light of your latest post I will consider you impossible to speak with.

If you think the two phrases mean the same thing, I would have to agree with your conclusion, because we don't speak the same language.