Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9173 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,585 Year: 4,842/9,624 Month: 190/427 Week: 0/103 Day: 0/8 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   the law
forgiven
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 9 (23947)
11-23-2002 3:16 PM


the main thrust of this thread is to keep the other from getting any longer *grin* and to answer john about the law... he made a pertinent statement:
"Right. The GOSPEL message... My contention is that this message does not track well with anything in the OT, from which this message is supposed to have been deived. And that this is why it never took a strong hold among Jews. Notice, even, that the person you have explaining this is writing some century plus after the fact and isn't a Jew."
i didn't understand the last sentence, maybe you can clarify that... i wrote a couple bible studies long ago on the book of romans, but that puter's long been dead and gone, so i'm sorry for this poor effort... anyway, here's the thing... paul (mainly) taught that *all* the old testament, and God's economy toward his people, showed the impossibility of obeying the law... romans 6 and 7 are good spots to start, but all his writings have a common theme ('cept maybe for the letters to timmy and titus)
see, paul knew the purpose of the law was like unto a tutor... in that time, a tutor was given charge of a child until she reached maturity, at which time she'd be capable of understanding the father's business and be mature enough to make decisions on her own... but the tutor wasn't the child, the tutor wasn't a part of the family, and the tutor would become obsolete and be replaced
he also tells us that the law was purposely designed with perfection of obediance as the goal... the law is a whole, it's not just the 10 commandments... break any part of the law, the whole law is broken... live it perfectly, they were told... the law was a burden placed on the jews to teach the impossibility of obedience... only a perfect man could obey it, all others would perish under its strictures
i know you know the "dogma" john, but it's important (maybe for someone else if not for you) to realize that the very fact that the law could never be perfectly obeyed was God's goal... there's no hope for "all have sinned and fallen short of God's glory"... this wasn't so before the law, for "when there is no law there is no offense"... kinda like, if there's no speed limit there's no speeding...
so the law had a reason, like the tutor had a reason.. to hold his people until they reached maturity, to teach them the impossibility of perfect obedience to that for which perfection was required... the gospel paul taught was that Jesus the Messiah *had* to be born a jew, *had* to be born under the law, and *had* to obey it perfectly because nobody else could...
paul asked rhetorically, "does this mean the law was evil?"... no, not at all... it was of God, but it had a purpose... to tutor (guide) his people until the coming of the one who could fulfill it...
now some in the early church, even tho they didn't ascribe to the law in its entirety, believed that *parts* of it had to be observed... principally circumcision, but this was (imho) an attempt to maintain some difference between jew and gentile, between those who were "God's chosen" and those who had always been "dogs"... but paul taught that, because of Christ, there was no longer a jew or a gentile or a man or a woman, no longer rich or poor... all who believed Jesus was the Lord made up God's israel...
who was right? i guess it depends on who you ask, but the gospel of Christ as taught by paul makes perfect sense... even peter, who came under criticism for living the gospel when not around "men sent by james" knew this... he knew the freedom from the law that came thru Christ, he lived in this freedom (showing his belief in it), but wasn't willing (that we know of) to push it with the judaizers
paul on the other hand knew and taught that there was only one gospel, and he warned the galatians (who were evidently under "attack" by these judaizers) to beware any teaching a "false gospel"... such teachers were "accursed"...
so paul taught that we died to the law, he taught that the law has no authority over us, he taught that Jesus fulfilled the law *for* us, and he taught that we now aren't under either the law's authority or the power of sin...
there's *so* much more to this and i rushed thru it (it's my wife's turn on the puter, sigh)... i sure hope i saved all those old studies on floppys but i don't think so... i'll look

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 11-26-2002 1:51 AM forgiven has replied

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 9 (24354)
11-26-2002 1:51 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by forgiven
11-23-2002 3:16 PM


Oh i really wanted to discuss this one.
------------------
saved by grace

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by forgiven, posted 11-23-2002 3:16 PM forgiven has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by forgiven, posted 11-26-2002 10:40 AM funkmasterfreaky has replied

  
forgiven
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 9 (24408)
11-26-2002 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by funkmasterfreaky
11-26-2002 1:51 AM


quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
Oh i really wanted to discuss this one.

discuss away then ... i just haven't found the time to do all the work i've done previously on this subject, but that doesn't mean we can't discuss it or any aspect of it that interests you...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 11-26-2002 1:51 AM funkmasterfreaky has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 11-26-2002 6:24 PM forgiven has replied

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 9 (24488)
11-26-2002 6:24 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by forgiven
11-26-2002 10:40 AM


quote:
"Right. The GOSPEL message... My contention is that this message does not track well with anything in the OT, from which this message is supposed to have been deived. And that this is why it never took a strong hold among Jews. Notice, even, that the person you have explaining this is writing some century plus after the fact and isn't a Jew."
Okay and Forgiven has gone over and i think/hope most have heard that the old testament is a historical record of the isrealites recorded not as it should have happened but just as it happened.
This record establishes God's law and his Holiness/hatred of sin, shows man complete inability fo fulfill the law. Teaches the faithfulness of God in how he is ever faithful to his people Israel despite the fact they consistently disobey him and seem to turn from him every second generation. Shows his power and his justice. So here is our basis of who is this God and what does he want anyway.
He wants us to love him as he loves us. He wants us to trust in him knowing that he will finish what he starts. HE wants us to OBEY him, as a father would have his children obey him. A father does not just give his child guidlines to make life difficult, he does it to keep that child safe and to help him grow and learn. Guidlines to guide that child into a healthy and productive life. The same way our Heavenly Father has done given us guidlines to guide our spiritual life. The important one the eternal one.
So now we know our father who he is what he wants and some guidelines to follow. Now we have the Gospel message. The message that this God who is just and faithful to his word has given us what he promises. Jesus Christ has made possible spiritual life by fulfilling the law with his life, and his victory over the grave. Now we can be spiritually alive (death- to be seperated from God, life- to be near to God). Now that law has been fulfilled the punishment for breaking that law has been taken if you take the right defense attourney. No longer do we need a high priest to intercede on our behalf as we already have a high priest at the right hand of God. No longer do we need to sacrafice to satisfy the law, this has already been done. The gospel message being now that we may approach the throne boldly, that we are under grace in Christ Jesus. We have a guidline to assist us in knowing God's will and the penalty of seperation from God has been paid, when Jesus took the sin of the world on him and said "my God my God why hast thou forsaken me".
So how does this not track well together? I haven't even started with the specifics.
You assume much to say the gospels were written centuries after the ressurection of the Lord Jesus. Is this based on merely looking at the copies available now? I would guess using my reason that due to the persecution of the early church these letters were difficult to preserve, especially if you look into the spiritual implications of what Jesus did on the cross. A defeated spiritual enemy desperate to destroy the message of salvation. Would probably use those under his control to attempt the destruction of this message.
However just because you have not found older copies of the new testament writings again does not mean that they do not exist. Luke has in the past been attacked viciously as a historian for his accounts in Luke and Acts. But then we find that those who attacked him are over and over having to hide their faces in shame as archeology confirms his accounts. His specific use of titles and names of gov't officials in the roman gov't are turning up very accurate considering the amount of position changes in this particular gov't. They seemed to play musical chairs quite a bit in the roman gov't, and luke consitently has them right. This alone to me points to accuracy and reliablity of the gospels.
Okay John I'm ready. I better start studying now EH. Well at least there's no hockey game to distract me tonight. lol
------------------
saved by grace

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by forgiven, posted 11-26-2002 10:40 AM forgiven has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by forgiven, posted 11-26-2002 6:42 PM funkmasterfreaky has replied

  
forgiven
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 9 (24493)
11-26-2002 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by funkmasterfreaky
11-26-2002 6:24 PM


^^^^^^^^^
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
~~snip to keep admin from doing it ... again~~
i couldn't have said it better, so i won't even try... hockey? bleechhhh... oh btw, i think most n.t. scholars place the gospels sometime after 70 a.d. ...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 11-26-2002 6:24 PM funkmasterfreaky has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 11-28-2002 8:24 PM forgiven has replied

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 9 (24857)
11-28-2002 8:24 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by forgiven
11-26-2002 6:42 PM


quote:
think most n.t. scholars place the gospels sometime after 70 a.d. ...
How can that be? There is no mention of the destruction of Jerusalem, Lukes account alone between Luke/Acts, is showing to be historically correct in his naming of gov't officials and their titles. This is no easy task with Roman officials as they rarely stayed in the same position for any great length of time. Promotion demotion and assasination all these things seemed to make the Roman gov't quite subject to change.
------------------
saved by grace

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by forgiven, posted 11-26-2002 6:42 PM forgiven has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by forgiven, posted 11-28-2002 11:50 PM funkmasterfreaky has replied

  
forgiven
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 9 (24885)
11-28-2002 11:50 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by funkmasterfreaky
11-28-2002 8:24 PM


^^^^^^^
here is a good link
http://campus.northpark.edu/...on/Mediterranean/Gospels.html
the main reason some give for them being written earlier is the book of acts... it's assumed it was written prior to paul's death ('bout 67 ad)... so those who so assume place acts around 62... they go from there to saying luke was written earlier, luke depended on mark so mark earlier still, etc etc... also the fact that the temple wasn't mentioned as being destroyed
now you're correct if you think i don't know when they were written ... all i've done is read the works of scholars, and there's no way i could ever gain the language or investigative skills on my own to unravel this... as far as i know, nobody places the gospels in the 2nd century... revelation is thought to be the closest, written (it is supposed) around 95 ad... but i'm not convinced of that, i think it was written earlier, before 70 in fact, since it actively speaks of the temple as still standing
the fact the temple isn't mentioned as being destroyed in the gospels doesn't really convince me of much, i can't see it even coming up given the nature of the documents... but i'm not dogmatic on the dates, ok? if they were written earlier, fine... if not, fine...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 11-28-2002 8:24 PM funkmasterfreaky has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 8:35 PM forgiven has replied

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 9 (27103)
12-17-2002 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by forgiven
11-28-2002 11:50 PM


just bringing this topic back. Some conversation has started in another thread to do with the law of moses. So I thought using this already started thread was a good idea instead of distracting the other thread from it's original point. Why is it thought that the law should apply to Christianity, to me the whole point was that it doesn't apply anymore?
------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.
[This message has been edited by funkmasterfreaky, 12-17-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by forgiven, posted 11-28-2002 11:50 PM forgiven has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by forgiven, posted 12-17-2002 8:47 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

  
forgiven
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 9 (27107)
12-17-2002 8:47 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by funkmasterfreaky
12-17-2002 8:35 PM


quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
just bringing this topic back. Some conversation has started in another thread to do with the law of moses. So I thought using this already started thread was a good idea instead of distracting the other thread from it's original point. Why is it thought that the law should apply to Christianity, to me the whole point was that it doesn't apply anymore?

the law doesn't apply anymore.. it had a purpose, it served its purpose, and now it has been replaced...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 8:35 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024