Why Wasn't A Law Given By Which One Could Be Righteous?
- Thread starter posthuman
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
but Israel did need this law, i presume? because He gave it. were they all unbelievers?
those with faith, kept it too. is it like the temple tax - Peter answered rightly; a king takes custom from strangers, not from his children - and Christ said 'lest we offend them' and sent him to get silver from a fish. is it like that? why both the believing and the unbelieving were put in subjection together?
well, Abraham was 430 years before 'the Law' -- so if he knew the perfect law, why was the Law later given at Horeb? what is that law for? "to make sin all the more sinful"? and then 1300 years later, Christ, revealing the perfect law, redeeming sinners?
trying to sort out, when we are looking at Exodus 20 through Deuteronomy, exactly what are we looking at? we are looking at the word of God - looking at testimony of Christ vs. anti-Christ - but what is this word of His?
For the LORD shall rise up as in mount Perazim, He shall be wroth as in the valley of Gibeon, that He may do his work, His strange work; and bring to pass His act, His strange act.
(Isaiah 28:21)
why could no one come near the mountain? what is that telling us about what He is doing, about the nature of what He is giving them?
He gave a very physical law. we can't pretend circumcision wasn't meant to be carried out. i'm not sure you're addressing my question:
why these carnal commandments instead of grace and truth ? the law says, do these things and you will live by them, but the scripture says, life cannot be attained by these things; the law is not of faith. the law as a guide, guides us to Christ - and in Him we have joy and life and peace, but in the law, we do not. we have curse & death. coming to Him, we die with Him, and die to the law, being set free from it, and have life. a Torah was not given that could impart life.
so why was the bondage of the law given ?
why not a law that actually could impart life, if such a thing could even exist?
Paul's definitely talking about Torah when he says "the law" -- don't be silly. he doesn't presume to break it into pieces, keep some and delete the rest. thinking so that is how to 'distort' his writings, to destruction ((2 Peter 3:16))
(In answer to the title question)
Righteousness must, of neccesity , come outside of the Law. Law is not the Cure, but only a pointer to the Cure. The Blood of Jesus is the Cure. This is the only Righteousness that saves.
Matthew 5:20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed [the righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Righteousness must, of neccesity , come outside of the Law. Law is not the Cure, but only a pointer to the Cure. The Blood of Jesus is the Cure. This is the only Righteousness that saves.
Matthew 5:20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed [the righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
I don't think your thoughts are the same as God's thought. You say "circumcision was meant to be carried out. God gave physical circumcision as a sign of belonging to God and until the Holy Spirit was given physical circumcision was to be the sign of belonging to God. Physical circumcision was to be carried out, and with the Holy Spirit it was to be carried out in truth and spirit, not by the flesh. Your statement doesn't fit.
You speak of law and faith as if one has to do with the other. It doesn't. We are saved as a gift of the Lord based on faith not our works, but if we have faith in the Lord we will obey His Laws. One fact does not wipe out anything. The teaching about faith stands, the teaching about sin stands. We repent of sin when we accept what Christ does for us and we are forgiven. That does not cancel the truth of faith being the key to forgiveness.
We are to study and learn about God and His ways from Torah. If we read about God in the Torah and ignore what God did about the fleshly laws then we are not learning what God directs us to learn from the Torah and we misrepresent it. We are told not to add to or take away any of God's teaching and if we say the Torah is about physical laws and not about God we are taking away what God tells us and misrepresenting the Torah.
We know from reading Acts and from reading the secular history of what the people in Christ's time called the Law of Moses. They were referring to the physical laws. We know that the Holy Spirit now does the work of the physical laws.
Exodus 19:3-6
3 And Moses went up unto God, and the Lord called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel;
4 Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself.
5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:
6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.
Exodus 20:18-19
18 And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking: and when the people saw it, they removed, and stood afar off.
19 And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die.
Galatians 3:19 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.
i said circumcision was given as a literal, physical command.
you said physical circumcision was given.
so you agreed with me, but then you said my statement doesn't fit.
the very statement you agreed with.
what is confusing you?
In Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands.
Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by Christ
(Colossians 2:11)
the circumcision that counts is not one you do. not even one you 'spiritually do' or 'symbolically observe' it is done by Christ. it is done to you not by you
and the law, vs. grace & truth, is like this also. the law says, do, and live. the law is not of faith. but truth is revealed to you, and grace is given to you. it isn't for sale, and it isn't earned.
so my question, the topic of this thread, is why?
why was a shadow given, which was never able to purify? why didn't the Substance give Himself then?
why the law, instead of grace and truth, 3300 years ago?
why not Christ, the spiritual Rock they drank from? instead, Sinai, a ministry of death that cannot make righteous, and wandering in wilderness. why not the promised land?
why a law not of faith?
i believe if we understand why the law, we'll understand better what the law is, and we'll be closer to seeing Christ in it clearly.
because of transgressions -- but the blood of bulls could never remove sin.
reminds me,
Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation,
just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.
(2 Peter 3:15)
(2 Peter 3:15)
that's a meaning that people twist ((per v. 16)), and it destroys them. under Moses, God was being patient with them -- even the captivity and woe, this was His patience toward them, until Shiloh come
i assume you are not unfamiliar with what the law literally says and how it was literally kept. do you not believe that it was physically followed and that it was meant to be physically followed? are the jots and tittles not describing physical actions? the people of Moses time, of Christ's time, and today refer to and think of 'the law of Moses' as something to be literally kept. with open eyes we understand that it is a picture of the Lord but that doesn't make it simply a metaphor not a real law. they are real, actual commands.
you're missing the point here. we know these shadows point to the Messiah. please re-read the OP, and stop accusing me of things i am in no wise saying;
why did God give the law, instead of giving the Messiah?
at the time of Moses: why command shadows instead of directly giving the Light, as He did when He became flesh?
not sure you are interpreting what i say right. i spoke of what the scripture speaks:
the law is not of faith: but, the man that doeth them shall live in them.
(Galatians 3:12)
so imagine today is ~ 1300BC ((or whenever, if there is controversy over dates)) and we have just been taken out of Egypt.
why the law, not being of faith?
why not faith?
any clues in Exodus 1-19? what happened before God gave them the Sinai covenant?
anything that might explain why He didn't entrust them at that time with what He now offers to all who believe Him?
anything that might inform us of why He gave them this law?
that's what i'm looking for. that's why i made this thread. i want to hear what people have to say about that question
If God didn't give the Law first people would not know they need a Saviour.
By knowing the FACT that you cannot be righteous by your work at the law you know you need Gods Help if you are to be Perfect as He is Perfect.
If God gave the Messiah and did not give the law people would not know their desperate need.
As it is we have people that don't understand the law and don't know they need the Lord.
Galatians 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
and this was His patience with them, to give them a law that reveals sin and teaches them how evil they are: why was this necessary?
i'm reminded, the first thing they say when they leave Egypt --
Because there were no graves in Egypt, have you taken us away to die in the wilderness?
Why have you so dealt with us, to bring us up out of Egypt?
(Exodus 14:11)
they accuse God of evil; they call Him a murderer, they say He has only created them in order to deny them life - same lie Satan tells Woman in the garden. Why have you so dealt with us, to bring us up out of Egypt?
(Exodus 14:11)
((@Blik -- clues in Exodus 1-19 as to why He gave them a ministry of death? a miktam?))
not sure you are interpreting what i say right. i spoke of what the scripture speaks:
the law is not of faith: but, the man that doeth them shall live in them. (Galatians 3:12)
so imagine today is ~ 1300BC ((or whenever, if there is controversy over dates)) and we have just been taken out of Egypt.
why the law, not being of faith?
why not faith?
any clues in Exodus 1-19? what happened before God gave them the Sinai covenant?
anything that might explain why He didn't entrust them at that time with what He now offers to all who believe Him?
anything that might inform us of why He gave them this law?
that's what i'm looking for. that's why i made this thread. i want to hear what people have to say about that question
They transgressed against Gods Grace. Multiple times.
They grumbled against Gods Provision.
They complained against Gods Saving them from slavery in Egypt.
They rejected Aaron and Moses.
And still God was patient.
But its also WHY the Law was given. Because Grace was rejected. (Which was the transgression talked about in Galatians 3...)
that's what i'm thinking, too
He said,
"this is the resting place, let the weary rest" and,
"this is the place of repose" -- but they would not listen.
(Isaiah 28:12)
"this is the resting place, let the weary rest" and,
"this is the place of repose" -- but they would not listen.
(Isaiah 28:12)
I don't see why there should be confusion. Until Christ came as a man and the Holy Spirit was given to all God gave the rituals to lead people to living a Godly life. Now we have the Holy Spirit to guide us and told to use that. Why is that so confusing?
i'm asking why Christ didn't come then. why did He give shadows instead of light, at that time?
Paul said the law is spiritual, holy, just, and good, and we do not void out the law through faith, but we establish the law, live up to it.
But Paul said he is carnal sold under sin so he could not live up to the law, but a person that hates sin, and does not want sin then by the Spirit they can abstain from sin for a Spirit led life will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh for they have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
Therefore a person that is led of the Spirit is not under the law for all their sins are forgiven, and they are not sinning obeying the law so the law cannot touch them for prosecution.
If you offend in the least of the law then you offend in all.
That which is natural is first then that which is spiritual.
The Old Testament was a physical covenant with physical laws and only for a benefit on earth, but the spiritual laws was there in the Old Testament.
God had them do physical ordinances that they could keep, but the spiritual law they would fail at for they could not have the Spirit and only had the power of the flesh to keep them, and it is the spiritual law, laws of love, moral laws obeyed perfectly that cause us to be right before God that they could never live up to perfectly.
The blood of bulls and goats covered their sins until Christ shed His blood to wash their sins away completely, and if they did not have the blood of bulls and goats to cover their sins they would not be right with God, and they would of died with sins and then the blood of Christ could not wash away their sins.
When Jesus and the saints rule over the world over the people that God spared at the battle of Armageddon the heathen have to go up year after year to Jerusalem to worship Jesus, and keep the feast of tabernacles a physical ordinance to be right with God for they cannot be spiritual for they followed the man of sin.
A person could obey the Old Testament physical ordinances and have the blood of animals cover their sins and they would receive the blessings of the Old Testament concerning this physical world upon them but would not receive spiritual salvation which Israel is blinded in part which they acknowledge the Old Testament for the majority but not the New so going by the Old Testament and not the New they are blinded in part and not totally blinded.
Righteousness cannot come by the law the physical laws without a doubt, and it cannot come by the spiritual laws without the Spirit, but by the Spirit we can establish the law, live up to it, for a Spirit led life gives us the power to overcome the flesh and abstain from sin.
But some people have a form of godliness, but they deny the Spirit leading them, ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth, and believe they are in a position of salvation despite holding unto sin.
But Paul said he is carnal sold under sin so he could not live up to the law, but a person that hates sin, and does not want sin then by the Spirit they can abstain from sin for a Spirit led life will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh for they have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
Therefore a person that is led of the Spirit is not under the law for all their sins are forgiven, and they are not sinning obeying the law so the law cannot touch them for prosecution.
If you offend in the least of the law then you offend in all.
That which is natural is first then that which is spiritual.
The Old Testament was a physical covenant with physical laws and only for a benefit on earth, but the spiritual laws was there in the Old Testament.
God had them do physical ordinances that they could keep, but the spiritual law they would fail at for they could not have the Spirit and only had the power of the flesh to keep them, and it is the spiritual law, laws of love, moral laws obeyed perfectly that cause us to be right before God that they could never live up to perfectly.
The blood of bulls and goats covered their sins until Christ shed His blood to wash their sins away completely, and if they did not have the blood of bulls and goats to cover their sins they would not be right with God, and they would of died with sins and then the blood of Christ could not wash away their sins.
When Jesus and the saints rule over the world over the people that God spared at the battle of Armageddon the heathen have to go up year after year to Jerusalem to worship Jesus, and keep the feast of tabernacles a physical ordinance to be right with God for they cannot be spiritual for they followed the man of sin.
A person could obey the Old Testament physical ordinances and have the blood of animals cover their sins and they would receive the blessings of the Old Testament concerning this physical world upon them but would not receive spiritual salvation which Israel is blinded in part which they acknowledge the Old Testament for the majority but not the New so going by the Old Testament and not the New they are blinded in part and not totally blinded.
Righteousness cannot come by the law the physical laws without a doubt, and it cannot come by the spiritual laws without the Spirit, but by the Spirit we can establish the law, live up to it, for a Spirit led life gives us the power to overcome the flesh and abstain from sin.
But some people have a form of godliness, but they deny the Spirit leading them, ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth, and believe they are in a position of salvation despite holding unto sin.
Do you mean this statement prior to Jesus or in general today? I can read it both ways and it is a little bit unclear to me.
I'm not sure I can agree with being partly blinded, although I have tried to fashion an argument as such in order to interact with people that I just want to witness to but they are not interested. Convincing myself that if they are closed to the gospel, at least by practicing morality and dying to one's flesh this would provide a better "launching pad" for the gospel in the future if/when they are open to it.
^I've lately rejected this concept, but I vacillate. It's hard to address because it only comes up when I encounter someone actively seeking after truth and righteousness but unable to fully grasp it. Doubts assail me and I find myself there also at times.
Like: When the cross is out of sight, do the next best thing mentality.
Thoughts?