"For what the Law could not do........."

[NotmebutHim]

I just started thinking about this:

Romans 3 says that the Law stops every mouth and that all of mankind is held guilty before God because of it.

Romans 7 says that the Law is not sin; rather it is holy, just and good.

Galatians 3 says that the Law was our schoolmaster/tutor and was added because of transgressions.

However, Romans 8 says that the Law was "weak" and that Christ accomplished on the cross what the Law could not do.

Knowing that the Scriptures "cannot be broken" and that there are no real contradictions in Scripture, I'm trying to wrap my head around this.

Was/is the Law sufficient for its intended purpose, or was it not? I also know that the word "law" has different meanings and applications in Scripture.

This is NOT meant to be a discussion of whether Christians should follow the Law or not, but instead a discussion of what Scripture says about its intent and purpose.

I also realize that I might very well answer my own question because of what Christ has done.

Thanks!

 

[Blik]

In almost all cases the word we read as law is a translation that originally came from the Hebrew word Torah. It is good to go to Strongs and read what the word Torah means. It is law, but not in the sense of a law given by governments that is something you must obey or be punished. It is more of counselings given by a loving Father. However, the law defines sin and the wages of sin is death that is only avoided through Christ.

If we go so far back in our history we learn about the garden of Eden, there was no need for law at that time. It was added because sin entered the world.

Moses gave many commands to the rather wild bunch that followed Moses in the wilderness. God spent 40 years shaping them up. They were a mixed crowd of people, even including some Egyptians. One of the helps the Lord gave them were things to do to remind them of the eternal laws like keeping their food only from animals who ate no garbage. They were to keep garbage from their minds, it was a help to remind them although it was true that it wasn't what went in their stomachs that defiled them. When Christ came, we were all given the Holy Spirit that acts for us in the way those commands acted for them. The Holy Spirit guides us. So scripture tells us the "law of Moses", as they were called, was cancelled.

God's eternal laws cannot be cancelled, they are as much a part of our world as our mountains and lakes.

 

[throughfaith]

I just started thinking about this:

Romans 3 says that the Law stops every mouth and that all of mankind is held guilty before God because of it.

Romans 7 says that the Law is not sin; rather it is holy, just and good.

Galatians 3 says that the Law was our schoolmaster/tutor and was added because of transgressions.

However, Romans 8 says that the Law was "weak" and that Christ accomplished on the cross what the Law could not do.

Knowing that the Scriptures "cannot be broken" and that there are no real contradictions in Scripture, I'm trying to wrap my head around this.

Was/is the Law sufficient for its intended purpose, or was it not? I also know that the word "law" has different meanings and applications in Scripture.

This is NOT meant to be a discussion of whether Christians should follow the Law or not, but instead a discussion of what Scripture says about its intent and purpose.

I also realize that I might very well answer my own question because of what Christ has done.

Thanks!

I just started thinking about this:

Romans 3 says that the Law stops every mouth and that all of mankind is held guilty before God because of it.

Romans 7 says that the Law is not sin; rather it is holy, just and good.

Galatians 3 says that the Law was our schoolmaster/tutor and was added because of transgressions.

However, Romans 8 says that the Law was "weak" and that Christ accomplished on the cross what the Law could not do.

Knowing that the Scriptures "cannot be broken" and that there are no real contradictions in Scripture, I'm trying to wrap my head around this.

Was/is the Law sufficient for its intended purpose, or was it not? I also know that the word "law" has different meanings and applications in Scripture.

This is NOT meant to be a discussion of whether Christians should follow the Law or not, but instead a discussion of what Scripture says about its intent and purpose.

I also realize that I might very well answer my own question because of what Christ has done.

Thanks!

The law was to drive them to faith .

 

[Benadam]

I just started thinking about this:

Romans 3 says that the Law stops every mouth and that all of mankind is held guilty before God because of it.

Romans 7 says that the Law is not sin; rather it is holy, just and good.

Galatians 3 says that the Law was our schoolmaster/tutor and was added because of transgressions.

However, Romans 8 says that the Law was "weak" and that Christ accomplished on the cross what the Law could not do.

Knowing that the Scriptures "cannot be broken" and that there are no real contradictions in Scripture, I'm trying to wrap my head around this.

Was/is the Law sufficient for its intended purpose, or was it not? I also know that the word "law" has different meanings and applications in Scripture.

This is NOT meant to be a discussion of whether Christians should follow the Law or not, but instead a discussion of what Scripture says about its intent and purpose.

I also realize that I might very well answer my own question because of what Christ has done.

Thanks!

Before the Law sin abound but was not imputed. Meaning no one could be convicted of sin and be guilty until the Law arrived. Once it did arrive the sin that wasn't imputed was imputed. Meaning sinful acts transgressed the Law. This dynamic also gave sin power over mankind. A power no one could overcome. The Law illuninated sin and revealed the need for a savior.

 

[Adstar]

I just started thinking about this:

Romans 3 says that the Law stops every mouth and that all of mankind is held guilty before God because of it.

Romans 7 says that the Law is not sin; rather it is holy, just and good.

Galatians 3 says that the Law was our schoolmaster/tutor and was added because of transgressions.

However, Romans 8 says that the Law was "weak" and that Christ accomplished on the cross what the Law could not do.

Knowing that the Scriptures "cannot be broken" and that there are no real contradictions in Scripture, I'm trying to wrap my head around this.

Was/is the Law sufficient for its intended purpose, or was it not? I also know that the word "law" has different meanings and applications in Scripture.

This is NOT meant to be a discussion of whether Christians should follow the Law or not, but instead a discussion of what Scripture says about its intent and purpose.

I also realize that I might very well answer my own question because of what Christ has done.

Thanks!

The Law was sufficient for it's intended purpose which was to convict all people of their Sin.. The Law reveals to all humans that they are sinners in need of the Atonement of the LORD Jesus Christ..

When the Bible talks about the Law was weak..

Romans 8 says that the Law was "weak" and that Christ accomplished on the cross what the Law could not do.

It is revealing that the Law could not succeed in bring people to eternal salvation.. Jesus revealed that salvation could only be had by people trusting in the Atonement He secured on the cross..

Many people in Jesus time and many people today where and now still are Works salvation believers who think that doing the law is the key to justifying themselves before God and getting them accepted as worthy to enter into Gods perfect eternity.. Of course real Christians who know the Gospel know that all of us are sinners and the Law convicts us of that fact and we are grateful for the loving gift Jesus secured for our forgiveness and justification on the cross..

So the scriptures are true and good and there is no inconsistency in the verses you have shared with us..

 

[Journeyman]

I just started thinking about this:

Romans 3 says that the Law stops every mouth and that all of mankind is held guilty before God because of it.

Romans 7 says that the Law is not sin; rather it is holy, just and good.

Galatians 3 says that the Law was our schoolmaster/tutor and was added because of transgressions.

However, Romans 8 says that the Law was "weak" and that Christ accomplished on the cross what the Law could not do.

Knowing that the Scriptures "cannot be broken" and that there are no real contradictions in Scripture, I'm trying to wrap my head around this.

Was/is the Law sufficient for its intended purpose, or was it not? I also know that the word "law" has different meanings and applications in Scripture.

This is NOT meant to be a discussion of whether Christians should follow the Law or not, but instead a discussion of what Scripture says about its intent and purpose.

I also realize that I might very well answer my own question because of what Christ has done.

Thanks!

In Rom.8:3, Paul is teaching how our Lord lived a sinless life and so the penalty for sin had no hold on him. He rose from death so that would believe in God.

 

[Blik]

Many people in Jesus time and many people today where and now still are Works salvation believers who think that doing the law is the key to justifying themselves before God and getting them accepted as worthy to enter into Gods perfect eternity.. Of course real Christians who know the Gospel know that all of us are sinners and the Law convicts us of that fact and we are grateful for the loving gift Jesus secured for our forgiveness and justification on the cross..
.

I have never read one post saying they are saved by their works. Would you tell us where these people are that you accuse of denying Christ?

I have read posts accusing people of denying Christ because a poster accepted that Christ made them as if they were sinless and they state that they are repentant of their sin. It almost seems some people feel they must want to sin in order to be sure they accept that Christ forgives sin. Paul says about this idea "God forbid".

 

[Dino246]

Moses gave many commands to the rather wild bunch that followed Moses in the wilderness. God spent 40 years shaping them up. They were a mixed crowd of people, even including some Egyptians.

This is a misrepresentation. The Israelites were primarily blood descendants of Jacob; any persons who weren't part of that clan by birth had to make a conscious choice to join themselves to Israel. The Law was given through Moses TO ISRAEL. The individuals who joined with Israel were subject to the Law of Israel. The Law was not given to all humanity!

One of the helps the Lord gave them were things to do to remind them of the eternal laws like keeping their food only from animals who ate no garbage.

This is another misrepresentation. God gave Israel a LAW that they were not to eat certain animals. The reasons are not part of the Law. The restrictions on which animals could be eaten were LAW, not "helps". You don't get kicked out of the community for violating a "help"; you get kicked out for violating a LAW. You can soft-pedal the term "Torah" all you like, but "law" is still the best and most accurate translation!

God's eternal laws cannot be cancelled, they are as much a part of our world as our mountains and lakes.

A third misrepresentation. The Law as given to Israel is not in the same category as physical constants. There is no judicial review and sentencing for trying to ignore gravity. There is for a man of ancient Israel gathering sticks on the Sabbath, eating pork, or refusing to participate in corporate worship when he is ceremonially clean.

God HIMSELF (through Paul) says the Law is cancelled in Christ. Instead of constantly trying to get humans to agree with your convoluted misunderstandings, you need to take up your case with Him, and work hard to understand the hard line of distinction between the old covenant and the new.

 

[Blik]

This is a misrepresentation. The Israelites were primarily blood descendants of Jacob; any persons who weren't part of that clan by birth had to make a conscious choice to join themselves to Israel. The Law was given through Moses TO ISRAEL. The individuals who joined with Israel were subject to the Law of Israel. The Law was not given to all humanity!


This is another misrepresentation. God gave Israel a LAW that they were not to eat certain animals. The reasons are not part of the Law. The restrictions on which animals could be eaten were LAW, not "helps". You don't get kicked out of the community for violating a "help"; you get kicked out for violating a LAW. You can soft-pedal the term "Torah" all you like, but "law" is still the best and most accurate translation!


A third misrepresentation. The Law as given to Israel is not in the same category as physical constants. There is no judicial review and sentencing for trying to ignore gravity. There is for a man of ancient Israel gathering sticks on the Sabbath, eating pork, or refusing to participate in corporate worship when he is ceremonially clean.

God HIMSELF (through Paul) says the Law is cancelled in Christ. Instead of constantly trying to get humans to agree with your convoluted misunderstandings, you need to take up your case with Him, and work hard to understand the hard line of distinction between the old covenant and the new.

You say it was not a mixed crowd who followed Moses! EXodus 12:38 New Living Translation A rabble of non-Israelites went with them, along with great flocks and herds of livestock. KJV Exodus 12:38 And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.

Do you really think that the law was not given as a help?

 

[Dino246]

You say it was not a mixed crowd who followed Moses!

No, I didn't.

 

[Magenta]

Galatians 3:22-25

 

[Magenta]

Romans 10:4

 

[gb9]

You say it was not a mixed crowd who followed Moses! EXodus 12:38 New Living Translation A rabble of non-Israelites went with them, along with great flocks and herds of livestock. KJV Exodus 12:38 And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.

Do you really think that the law was not given as a help?

multiple times in the O.T. , God referred to the " covenant He made with the people whom He brought out of egypt".

so, as i have tole you before, unless you can trace your ancestry back to those who crossed the red sea, then that covenant was not for you.

it was made with a certain people in a certain time concerning a certain piece of land ( when you go into the land I give you).

 

[Blik]

multiple times in the O.T. , God referred to the " covenant He made with the people whom He brought out of egypt".

so, as i have tole you before, unless you can trace your ancestry back to those who crossed the red sea, then that covenant was not for you.

it was made with a certain people in a certain time concerning a certain piece of land ( when you go into the land I give you).

God turned the mixed crowd brought out of Egypt into Israelites

 

[Blik]

multiple times in the O.T. , God referred to the " covenant He made with the people whom He brought out of egypt".

so, as i have tole you before, unless you can trace your ancestry back to those who crossed the red sea, then that covenant was not for you.

it was made with a certain people in a certain time concerning a certain piece of land ( when you go into the land I give you).

You often say that God speaks only to the Israelites, and I have often pointed out to you that there are many scriptures that refutes this wrong idea. Over and over scripture tells us that God is including the strangers and sojourners among the Israelites.

All scripture states that there is only one God who created all things, not the Israelites only. God loves all people, God cares for all people, never Israelites only. Any person of any nation was always free to join in worshiping the one true God, God of all people not Israelites only.

 

[gb9]

God turned the mixed crowd brought out of Egypt into Israelites

yes. and if one cannot trace their ancestry back to those, then one was never under the Old Covenant.

the fathers of those who came out of egypt. that is God's own description of whom He made the Covenant with.

 

[Blik]

yes. and if one cannot trace their ancestry back to those, then one was never under the Old Covenant.

the fathers of those who came out of egypt. that is God's own description of whom He made the Covenant with.

The mixed crowd that came out of Egypt spent 40 years being converted into Israel. Gentiles are and always have been welcomed into the house of Israel for God is a God of all creation. There are three gentile women listed in Matthew as ancestors of Christ.

 

[Guojing]

The mixed crowd that came out of Egypt spent 40 years being converted into Israel. Gentiles are and always have been welcomed into the house of Israel for God is a God of all creation. There are three gentile women listed in Matthew as ancestors of Christ.

In the OT, once you are converted into Israel, you were no longer a gentile. (Esther 8:17)

17 And in every province, and in every city, whithersoever the king's commandment and his decree came, the Jews had joy and gladness, a feast and a good day. And many of the people of the land became Jews; for the fear of the Jews fell upon them.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Was/is the Law sufficient for its intended purpose, or was it not?

Yes, it was. The Law (the Ten Commandments) had many purposes, and they were all fulfilled. The Law was there to (1) expose the sinfulness of all mankind, but at the same time to show that (2) no one could keep the Law perfectly. Therefore (3) the Law became the schoolmaster or tutor to lead men to Christ, who not only fulfilled the Law but took the curse of the Law upon Himself.

The Law shows sinners their need of the Savior, since He offers the gift of eternal life to those who believe on Him. And justification is by grace through faith, not by the works of the Law. The Law was "weak" in that animal sacrifices could not take away sins. Hence Christ became the Lamb of God to take away the sin of the world.

 

[gb9]

The mixed crowd that came out of Egypt spent 40 years being converted into Israel. Gentiles are and always have been welcomed into the house of Israel for God is a God of all creation. There are three gentile women listed in Matthew as ancestors of Christ.

so, in other words , you are going to ignore what God said about whom He made a covenant with, and put your personal beliefs above what Scripture says.....