made nothing perfect
|
Posted:Feb 20, 2011 5:18 am
Last Updated:Feb 25, 2011 6:09 am 2219 Views
|
Heb 7:11 Now if perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood - for on this basis the people received the law - what further need would there be to speak of appointing another kind of priest according to the order of Melchizedek, not one according to the order of Aaron? 12 For when a change in the priesthood takes place, there must also be a change in the law. 13 For the person we are talking about belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the altar.
14 For it is obvious that our Lord was a descendant of Judah, and Moses said nothing about priests coming from that tribe. 15 This point is even more obvious in that another priest who is like Melchizedek has appeared, 16 who was appointed to be a priest, not on the basis of a regulation concerning his ancestry, but rather on the basis of the power of an indestructible life.
17 For it is declared about him, "You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek." 18 Indeed, the cancellation of the former regulation has occurred because it was weak and ineffective 19 (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we approach God. 20 Now none of this happened without an oath. Others became priests without any oath,
21 but Jesus became a priest with an oath when God said to him, "The Lord has taken an oath and will not change his mind. You are a priest forever." 22 In this way, Jesus has become the guarantor of a better covenant. 23 There have been many priests, since they have been prevented by death from continuing in office.
24 But because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. 25 Therefore, because he always lives to intercede for them, he is able to save completely those who come to God through him. 26 We need such a high priest - one who is holy, innocent, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. 27 He does not need to offer sacrifices every day like those high priests, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he sacrificed himself. 28 For the law appoints as high priests men who are weak, but God's oath, which came after the law, appoints a who has been made perfect forever.
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
My fav Chapter
|
Posted:Feb 20, 2011 5:12 am
Last Updated:Feb 20, 2011 1:34 pm 1690 Views
|
Galatians 3:1 You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified? 2 This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? 3 Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? 4 Did you suffer so many things in vain--if indeed it was in vain?
5 So then, does He who provides you with the Spirit and works miracles among you, do it by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? 6 Even so Abraham BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS. 7 Therefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham. 8 The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, "ALL THE NATIONS WILL BE BLESSED IN YOU ." 9 So then those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham, the believer.
10 For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, "CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT ABIDE BY ALL THINGS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW, TO PERFORM THEM." 11 Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, "THE RIGHTEOUS MAN SHALL LIVE BY FAITH."
12 However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, "HE WHO PRACTICES THEM SHALL LIVE BY THEM." 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us--for it is written, "CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE"-- 14 in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. 15 Brethren, I speak in terms of human relations: even though it is only a man's covenant, yet when it has been ratified, no one sets it aside or adds conditions to it.
16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, "And to seeds," as referring to many, but rather to one, "And to your seed," that is, Christ. 17 What I am saying is this: the Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise.
18 For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise; but God has granted it to Abraham by means of a promise. 19 Why the Law then? It was added because of transgressions, having been ordained through angels by the agency of a mediator, until the seed would come to whom the promise had been made. 20 Now a mediator is not for one party only; whereas God is only one.
21 Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law. 22 But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. 23 But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed.
24 Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise.
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
Truth becomes the Sacrifice
|
Posted:Feb 17, 2011 7:11 am
Last Updated:Jun 18, 2011 2:40 pm 2049 Views
|
"Truth becomes the sacrifice:
When absolutism is out, and relativism is in;
When obedience is out, and pragmatism is in;
When teaching is out, and dialogue is in;
When thus saith the Lord is out, and consensus of opinion is in;
When using Scripture to judge right and wrong is out, and unity with tolerance at all costs is in;
When the narrow way is out, and the broad way is in."
(Tamara Hartzell, In The Name of Purpose: Sacrificing Truth on the Altar of Unity)
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
What is real Spiritual Warfare...scripturally
|
Posted:Feb 16, 2011 1:49 pm
Last Updated:Feb 18, 2011 2:08 pm 1413 Views
|
let us reason Ministries:
Spiritual Warfare
Biblical Binding and Loosing
Today we see people using the term of binding and loosing as an exercise of their spiritual authority as believers over Satan, and demonic powers and beings in the spiritual realm. Many people are convinced because of the results.
People are claiming that we have the authority and power to bind the devil and his demons. Some say that we can also bind sickness like cancer, and loose people from the devil's hold, which can include poverty.
After two years of prayer and fasting proclaiming the games would not be held the Christians in Canada were unable to stop the Gay Olympics held in Vancouver. (Prophecy today magazine). David Wilkerson wrote in his newsletter April 1991, “The entire church structure of America could not stop the showing of (The blasphemous film) “The last Temptation of Christ”… in twenty five years, have we stopped abortion? No, it’s worse than ever…there are Christians right now who claim they are taking the world for Jesus. But I don’t know of one country they have taken.”
We find many spiritual warfare seminars and prayer meetings going on to train the church in its position to take back what is rightfully ours. The church has become serious and militant in taking back the ground for Christ. With good intentions, people are trained to rid the devil and sin from society and our cities by exercising our authority in warfare praying and declarations. They take their Biblical authority over them by binding them, verbally abusing the fallen angels, even sending them back to the pit from where they came (which is not really where they come from or go to. This will be addressed later). Scripture used to validate this are Mt.12:29, 16:19, 18:18 and Mk.3:27.
Matt. 28:18-20 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.” All authority has not been passed on to us. We need to be under his authority to have any.
Spiritual mapping is also used to identify the particular strongholds set up in certain areas. It consists of creating a geographical map which they can mark for their research. Those involved in this movement can then research a locations history and learn from its past what brought it in bondage as in certain false religions. By learning the details of the past and activities of the present it can give the prayer warriors knowledge to effectively bind the powers that be. Territorial spirits are considered to be in control over cities, schools, and religions. These territorial Spirits are top ranking principalities (demons) which “attempt to keep large numbers of humans… in spiritual captivity.” (C. Peter Wagner Confronting the powers pg.22) Methodology is used as in copying Joshua who marched with the Israelites around Jericho and blew the trumpet on the last day and the city crumbled. By prayer marching and shouting against the enemy singing and praying the walls the enemy has built will come tumbling down.
There is also the element of hearing from God directly who gives the prayer warriors words of knowledge. This becomes a critical factor to successful warfare otherwise one might miss the target they are aiming for and they will not be bound. Names of demons are revealed through extra- Biblical revelation to the sensitive prayer warrior.
The leading promoters of these prayer march’s are Steve Hawthorne and Graham Kendrick of the march for Jesus fame. They call this prayer walking as “praying on site with insight”. While this has become a new type of cliché for the for the spiritually discerned who receive strategic spiritual information directly from the Spirit one can only wonder how this is verified as accurate except by experience.
While there is nothing wrong with walking and praying its what they make out of it that distorts its meaning. Prayer walking and prayer Marches are used to confront the enemy and to push back and bind his power with praises and spiritual warfare songs. The concept is demons can’t stand praises to God so they flee. People are led into an intense program of strategic level of intercessory prayer addressing Satan and principalities by name. By tearing down the strongholds built by the enemy they believe they can cleanse whole areas in the cities of sin.
Identificational repentance is used which consists of those people confessing what their forefathers did to another race and asking forgiveness for them. This is ancestral repentance in that one can intercede and erase what others have done generations before. We are told this must be done to have forgiveness. In the book Perpetuated in Righteousness a Haole pastor (stranger- not locale) repents for all the Christians that came before him that caused the Hawaiians any hurt or pain and asks to forgive him. While this may have good intentions forgiveness only comes by individuals not from single person representing a whole race or group of people to another group. Especially when the initial ones offended are no longer here to forgive.
At these spiritual warfare sessions the audience participates together in calling down spirits of adultery, greed, homosexuality to the demons of alcohol and lust. While the participants' emotions soar at the outcome this in no way validates the means or the results (which usually are none except to feel good in a army like camaraderie and that has exercised their spiritual power over the enemy.) This is all done so that their will be no obstruction to the Gospel when it is preached. What we see as a theological slant is that we take the earthly dominion back ourselves. It is a restoration theology that is being promoted which is foreign to the scripture. It is Christ who will restore the Earth in the Millennium he has not given this power or authority over into the hands of man.
We cannot Christianize the world but we can make individual people Christians. Not by binding the demons to set them free but by preaching the Gospel and making disciples.
Looking at Mk.3:27 If one is being instructed by Jesus to bind Satan first so that the Gospel will not be obstructed then he himself did not follow his own explanation and neither did his apostles. We cannot stop other people from committing their sins by binding the demons. While prayer does move the hand of God to do miraculous things we do not have the authority to do what only God himself can do. Essentially each person has to make a choice on their own. If someone does not want to be delivered we cannot force deliverance over a person or a city. Spiritual warfare is a personal resistance for each of us against our own sinful desires which the enemy will use to his advantage. He will try to annul our effectiveness and tempt us to walk contrary to the word of God.
If one were to look at the scripture without any preconceived ideas, what is found is that prayer is address to God only. In Gal. 5:19-22, much of what is blamed on demons is really man's fallen nature, expressing itself through his flesh. Although demons can entice and exaggerate our flesh indulgences we can honestly blame ourselves for most of the activity we see today.
While we see in scripture Satan is the prince of this world, John 12:31 God of this world 2 Cor. 4:4 and the prince of power of the Eph. 2:2.
We can in no way draw a conclusion of cultural demonization in which whole cities, ethnic groups, and religions are involved, and that we as Christians come to set people free by binding the strong man and his hold. While it is true that religions have a spiritual deception, there are many invented by mans imagination and that one does not have to be religious to be blind to the Gospel.
*In Pagan theology when one would win the battle over another god they received his goods and territory. To pull down the head demon over an area and they will win that property for the Lord. Gnostics believed in strongholds located over cities in the sky. This is similar to the underlying philosophy of the Spiritual Warfare movement that we take it back with force reclaiming the cities for God. In Zoroatrianism, a Persian Gnostic religion there was the concept of two major Gods …”A good god rules the spiritual world and a bad god rules the physical realm….the problem of evil is solved by blaming everything that goes wrong on the bad god (the devil); the good god is seen no more than a counter balance. One is left with the impression that the two gods each possess equal power both in quality and quantity. Everything that is wrong in the world is the fault of the bad god. And its up to the initiate or believer to make sure the good god wins” (The Agony of deceit, moody press pp.133)
In the religion of the Vikings Odin the head God did good and whenever something went wrong it was the evil one Loki. Today people think God always does good and gives them abundance and its the devil who takes away and makes them suffer or hinders prayers. The bible teaches that God does destroy as well, and will take away things if he sees fit to do so, its not always an either or situation.
Paul was confronted with a whole city given over to idolatry in Acts17, how does he deal with this situation? He did not go into warfare prayer against their main gods Zeus or Apollo nor bind their idolatry. As he went into the synagogues and market place each day it ended on Mars hill where he challenged all the philosophies of their day. He promoted scripture and reasoned to them with the teaching of Christ, specifically the resurrection something he knew they would have a hard time with. He challenged them to make a decision.
What is the Believer’s Authority
We see Jesus, Paul and seventy disciples casting out demons (not from Christians) in Luke 10: 19. Jesus gives the 70 disciples authority over serpents and scorpions and all the power of the enemy. This statement meant all the different workings of the enemy. (Examples of casting out demons Jesus Mk.5:1-20, the 12 apostles Mt.10:1, 70 disciples Lk.10:17, others Mk.9:38-39, Philip Acts 8 Paul Acts 19:11-12 .
Luke 10:19-20 “Behold, I give you the authority to trample on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall by any means hurt you.20 “Nevertheless do not rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you, but rather rejoice because your names are written in heaven.”
Mark 9:28-29And when He had come into the house, His disciples asked Him privately, “Why could we not cast him out?” So He said to them, “This kind can come out by nothing but prayer and fasting.” They still did not have the power to cast a certain demon out. Jesus said these do not go out except by prayer and fasting.
The disciples clearly did not have all authority because some demons did not leave and Jesus told them these do not come out without prayer and fasting ,in other words they had to rely on God not the authority given to them.
In other words we are to pray to God. Not bind up or punch out the demon. We do not have ALL authority, Jesus does. But casting out demons was not the major theme of their ministry. After the disciples came back using the authority given to them Jesus said, instead they should rejoice over their names being written in the book of life. Their ministry was to have the Gospel preached, it alone is the power of God to set people free. When one has Christ living in them, the power of the enemy is broken. (I John 3: One can certainly cast out a demon, however Jesus said if the house that is swept clean is not filled it will be in worse shape since the enemy will come back with seven more demons making the latter state worse than the first. (Mt.12:43-45) This he used as an example of what would happen to Israel the nation if they did not accept him. It was destroyed and scattered.
So how can passages such as Luke 10:19 be interpreted? If one is under attack by the enemy, James 5 tells us to submit to God, resist in the Holy Spirit and the devil will flee. Whatever we might be disobedient in, we then submit to God first, then resist, and the enemy will no longer have a foothold in our lives.
We do not see any verbal rebukes when the apostles entered a new city or had prayers of pulling down strongholds over cities, cultures, or religions. There is not even a hint of this type of teaching in the word.
Take for instance Paul who himself was a victim of a Satanic messenger (Thorn in the flesh 2Cor.12: This would have been the perfect time for him to exercise his spiritual authority over Satan. Instead he petitioned the Lord for relief. He did not rebuke the demon nor find his operating status. God’s answer came in the assurance that his grace is sufficient. Paul didn't have an idea he could rebuke the enemy. Would this be acceptable to those who engage in the battle of Spiritual warfare today? I think not! We can also see the enemy was not inside him either in which he would need deliverance. While we can be tempted, oppressed and harassed and even afflicted by the enemy we cannot be controlled.
What we find is today's binding and loosing is a term taken out of its context and put in a spiritual exercise for today's Christians who are looking for more power. Unfortunately, this movement continues and is leading many into a spiritual exercise of futility.
Maybe you can remember back 10 years ago with Larry Lea's spiritual warfare army he was gathering of 300,000 together (of course to join this elite army cost each $100). I watched as he instructed them to pull out their swords (this is on video tape in files) and slash the enemy to bind him by swinging their swords in the air .This is how the world does it warfare except this was strictly imagination. It was Peter who pulled out his sword to protect Jesus when he was being arrested and slashed off the ear of the servant of the high Priest. Not too good a aim for a carnal battle. Jesus replied,” all those who live by the sword will die by the sword.”(Mt.26:52) We can't use fleshly methods to win spiritual battles.
So how does this all relate to people using this authority in the spiritual realm on Satan and his demons?
In 2 Peter 2:9-12 we find a description of self-willed men walking carnally not respecting authority, but speak evil of angels, vs.1 It tells us these angels who are superior to us, we should not defame or accuse, but be respectful even if they are our enemy because of their position,
Jude 8- 10 - The author describes people in the church who despise authority and speak evil of those who god has given positions of dominion in. not only do they rebel against the government ( which at the time was a one world government ) but they speak evil of dignitaries Greek- Doxai - glorious ones. Most have interpreted this as the angels, which certainly fits the context. Peter in 2 Pet. Seems to make the same point as Jude follows his structured outline being of a later date. “ and especially those who walk according to the flesh in the lust of uncleanness and despise authority. They are presumptuous, self willed. They are not afraid to speak evil of dignitaries. Whereas angels, who are greater in power and might, do not bring a railing accusation against them before the Lord. Here we have both authors mentioning those who had no respect for those who are in a higher position even though they are fallen and will be judged.
We see even Michael the arch-angel did not condemn Satan, but said, “The Lord rebuke you.” Michael who is even greater than we are did not use insulting words or exert his authority. Satan is still a dignitary of the highest order so there was no disrespect of his office and position even though he is an enemy. He deferred the issue to God, he trusted the Lord to step in between them on this issue. If an angel of this order is careful with how he treats the enemy how much more should we be.
Vs. 8 and I0 describe people who speak evil of fallen angels because of having little understanding of who they are speaking to.
To sum up all this, we simply do not have the kind of authority or power to put demons in chains or chase them away from the cities. Those who claim to be doing this are not doing too good a job anyway. If they bind him how long does this last since his work continues? By now every demon and his cousin should have been incarcerated. Who’s the joker that keeps letting him loose? The Bible tells us the world will come increasingly evil, that perilous times will come (they have already arrived) we are not going to turn it around. This will culminate by the seals being broken and judgment poured out on a rebellious mankind. We can’t we bind Satan, for he will be bound for one thousand years in the millennium by a specific angel. This does not exclude us from doing good and being light and salt in a society that is putrefying.
Yet today, we do have the authority and the strength to resist the devil's temptations and lies by submitting to God, standing in Christ, and putting on His armor. (Ephesians 6:12; James 4)
By being in the world and not influenced from it we are obedient to Jesus, the evil one cannot touch us. In John 17:15, Jesus prays we would be kept from the evil one. We are able to resist his temptations, because greater is He who is in us than he who is in the world. By walking in the light, we have discernment of his schemes and the evil one cannot overcome us and take us captive, that light is in the word.
When someone blames a demon for whatever habit of sin they may have been entrapped in, they then depend on their deliverance by an anointed deliverer to have it remitted. They then go home with the impression that the problem is cured not realizing that most of their battle comes from the sin nature that still dwells within. Whether it is a smoking demon or one of bad eyesight or just plain lust it never goes away and then they are under the impression of having another satanic attack because it resurfaced. This is all a placebo which works form the power of suggestion only. They have never dealt with the real source of the problem. The scripture says otherwise that as long as we are in these bodies we will wrestle against our old nature which continually comes back to life . This is why Paul said reckon your old self as dead. A demon cannot ever make someone do something unless they gravitate toward that already Jm.1:14-16.
The prince of Persia is used as an example of Spiritual warfare prayer. If we look closer at this event the spiritual warfare interpretation is faulty. Daniel wasn’t praying to bind the prince of Persia, he didn’t even know the battle was taking place. He was praying for a revelation of prophecy. He was seeking knowledge of the future events of his people. The prince was not given over into Daniel’s hands or the angel Michael's, nor was he sent to hell. He was replaced by another satanic one, the prince of Greece who came afterwards who was even worse. So if this was binding like they say, it did not work but backfired.
When Moses conquered the Egyptian gods by Yahweh’s hand , Israel was finally delivered from Pharaoh’s oppression they did not go back in and conquer the land and take it for God. They headed for the promised land and so should we. Our eyes should be on the heavenly land we are citizen’s of, not an earthly dominion. Also an important note is that it was when the blood of the lamb and the word of the Lord was instituted that they were set free. It was trusting in what God said to protect them.
1 Jn.3:18 it states “The of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the Devil.”
Notice it says his works not the Devil himself. Satan was defeated at the cross Col.2:15 “Having disarmed principalities and powers He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.” The devil and his angels fate is already sealed yet God allows them to continue. But they have no power over a Christian. He works in the sons of disobedience and will continue to do so until he is bound by God, not us.
What is Biblical binding and loosing
For us to understand its true meaning, we need to go to the text it was first used in Matt. 16:13-20. (Remember, all scripture is to be read in its context for us to understand the original intent of the author.)
Matt. 16:13-20 -- Jesus asked the disciples a direct question of who they say He is. Peter is then given a revelation from the Father calling Him the Messiah, the of the Living God.
Jesus then states He will build His Church on Peter's statement of who He is. (Meaning the deity of Christ is what the Church is built on -- this is the fundamental confession of faith.) And the gates of hell will not overcome it ever. In Vs. 19 We see the term we are looking into -- Jesus speaks to Peter and gives him the keys of the Kingdom. “Whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven, whatever you loose on earth is loosed in heaven”.
Giving keys to a person signified an entrusting with him to do an important task, in the scriptures they are used a symbol of authority and power, which is given specifically to Peter for his role in the beginning of the church.
Binding and loosing were used in two different manners judicially and legislatively. The traditional meaning was used in a -judicial sense “to bind” meant to punish, “to loose” meant to release from punishment.
Used legislatively “to bind” meant to forbid something, “to loose” meant to permit.
The terms of binding and loosing were used by the Rabbis as legislative authority in interpreting scripture. The Pharisees used this authority to permit laws that were forbidden and forbid laws that were permitted. By doing this they elevated their own authority to add onto the scriptures extra laws which were man-made and became tradition.
We see Peter using the keys beginning in the book of Acts, when the Church is born. He used his authority by opening the door to three groups to enter the body of Christ on three separate occasions, using the keys legislatively (loosing) to permit that which was formerly not permitted such as the gentiles to be part of Gods kingdom by faith.
In Acts 2:5-41 - In his first sermon to the Jews on Pentecost, 3,000 Jews were saved (although the Jewish people are given the Gospel first and are the natural branches in the olive tree, the church is beginning to be formed, it will consist of both Jews and gentiles as believers in one body). Eph. 2:14-17.
In Acts 8:14-17 - To the Samaritans, Philip preached, they believed, vs. 12 -- Peter then came and laid hands on them, vs. 17 -- (both Peter and John).
Peter used the keys in a judicial sense binding punishing Annanias and Sapphirra for their lying to the Holy Spirit.
Peter also uses these keys in a legislative sense of ‘loosing” something after he has the vision in Acts 10:9-48. The Lord was telling him to eat what was on the sheet. Peter refused because it was forbidden to eat unclean animals under the mosaic Law. After three times of the Lord saying to eat because they are now clean, Peter then begins to contemplate what the vision means. This had a two-fold meaning at now what was once forbidden as food is now permitted, from this Peter concludes as he sees that the Lord had cleansed all by his blood.
In Acts 10:44-48 - To the Gentiles - Peter used his authority to permit these into the body of Christ, by recognizing God's work that was done by Spirit baptism. (I Cor. 12:13)
Other Examples of Keys Used in the Scripture
Isaiah 22:22 -- Eliakim is given the key to the House of David. To Bind and loose” was the function of a gatekeeper” or “steward” (oikonomos) He would have the keys so he could go into the temple area having access to the presence of God.
Revelation 3 -- Jesus addresses the faithful church of Philadelphia. He, Jesus, has the Key of David (rulership - Isaiah 9:6-7). And is able to open and shut doors for His churches work in a legislative sense. Revelation 1: 18 Jesus has the keys of death and Hades. It is he who controls live and death and judges the intents of the heart.
Mt. 28:18 - All authority has been given to Him. He controls this in a judicial sense. He is the head of the Church as well as the universe.
Revelation 20:1-3 - Satan is bound after the second coming by an angel for one thousand years. This angel has the key to the bottomless pit. Today we are not able to bind his activity, this will not be possible until the second coming of Christ by the authority of a special angel, this is done in a judicial sense.
Matthew 18:15-20
There is also another text of binding and loosing found in Matthew 18:15-20. This text is used in the application of Church discipline. This particular use of binding and loosing is valid and current in today's church. Peter one of the chief elders was given this authority in his functional position in the church.
We are told in this text that when one brother commits a trespass to another brother, the one offended is to go to the offender alone the first time, v.16. If he does not listen, or agree with the offended brother, then the offended brother is to take one or two more as witnesses to work this out. If there is still no cooperation, the one who offended is to be placed under church discipline. (Excommunication until he comes into reconciliation.) This is a progression of steps to be taken toward reconciliation until there is no alternative. The goal is always to be restoration.
Verses 18-20, the two or three in agreement, asking the Father in Jesus' name is in the context of counseling brothers for reconciliation. Jesus is in the midst of them, as the Counselor-Peacemaker. If you are gathered in His Name, His will is to bring peace to all situations. (Whatever we touch and agree on, v.19.)
The church today can only function in binding in a judicial sense which is in reference to church discipline not going after demons like Ghostbusters
John 20:23
This too is authority given, it is a declaration the apostles issued as an agreement to the work of the Holy Spirit in a sinner. It is in reference to salvation, they could pronounce on the promise of Christ. That if one believed and repented they would have salvation. Then accepting those who receive Christ and are placed into his body to become part of the Church. Also, it's relative to church discipline, by receiving someone back who was excommunicated or to continue (retain) the disciplinary action it is a term of agreement.
2 Corinthians 10:4-5
“Our weapons are not carnal (of flesh) but mighty in God for the pulling down of strongholds, casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God”. Prayer and the word is our weapon if used correctly the walls will come tumbling down. strongholds are fortresses built to oppose the truth of Christ and the word. Walls are built with false ideologies and philosophies that have taken people captive. In other words it is untruth, false patterns of thinking, vain imaginations that hold people captive.
Evolution, false spirituality, sensuality without repercussions all the works of the flesh. Lies such as death is only a transition to a higher plane , everyone that is good is going to heaven.
The enemies strongholds are pulled down with the word of truth. When the Gospel is presented against the thoughts contrary to God's word (in an apologetic fashion such as Paul reasoned with the Jews from the scriptures) they will be brought into captivity and obedience to Christ. The Gospel is our presentation. All the power of the enemy is held in a lie that is believed to be the truth. The current philosophies and worldly ideas of our day that are esteemed as truth are exposed as only mans wisdom against the eternal truth of God. All falsehood is seen clearly next to the straight ruler edge of the word. The Gospel is veiled to those who are perishing 2 Cor.11:14. It is up to us to make sense out of it.
It is the truth of the word that cast down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God. This can also be applied to us personally as we conform ourselves to the word, things that we once thought and had practiced that were contrary to the word are broken and brought into submission with obedience to the truth.Vs.6 Could mean when you overcome your own disobedience your punishing your old nature by your obedience it deals with self control instead of uncontrol.
Ephesians 6:12
Speaks of a spiritual war that is taking place on earth for the heart and minds of everyone whether they know it or not. It is an influence from the spirit realm with deceiving spirits. The same spirit that can give a psychic insight by feelings and colors or thoughts can also move someone to suicide or false teaching. In other words what a spirit does, is not their name, it is their current activity. While mans spirit is dead in relationship to God until he is forgiven cleansed by Christ’s blood. He can be very much alive to spiritual experiences from other spirits who want us to believe that we are experiencing God.
Principality = (Archai) governing authority over nations. Positions over nations
Powers =(Gr.Dynameis) angels invested with authority and ability.
Rulers of the darkness of this age = expresses the powers of authority and influence over the world system.
Spiritual Hosts of wickedness= express their character and nature as an opposing army they have military organization.
While this scripture is used to teach pulling down demonic strongholds, looking for the particular names and activities of these demons are common practice we find their is no validity to this interpretation.
Biblical Strategy in Warfare
What it really is stating is that there is an invisible enemy who has different functions like an army with organized opposition to the world and especially to the believer. Yet if we read it in context, vs. 13 tells us to put on the full armor of God to be able to stand in the evil day. Our battle is fought on three fronts; the world (love of the world), the flesh (desires of the flesh), the devil (his deceptions and temptations). The enemy studies us and stalks us by stealth, It is when he is uncovered and exposed for what he is doing that he loses his influence.
The devil will come at us at our weakest times. Look at the example of Jesus after 40 days he hungered, in other words he could have starved if he didn't eat. The Devil waited until at this time to launch his attack. When Jesus was tempted by the devil he resisted him by quoting scripture that was relevant to his situation. He destroyed the lie propagated by putting the truth next to it. We need to have a comprehensive working knowledge of scripture to be victorious. Jesus resisted the enemy three times by quoting relevant scripture to each temptation. When Jesus was challenged on doctrine such as the resurrection by the Sadducees. He responded by stating Scripture with authority saying “You are mistaken not knowing the scriptures nor the power of God ” (Mt.22:29). This is what is meant by Paul “to put on the armor.” We need to be consistent in our walk by practicing obedience otherwise when that evil day comes we will not be able to stand. No one learns to fight a battle in one day so their needs to be a consistent resistance against the enemy otherwise we will fold during the main battle. It states in the Old Testament in Jeremiah, “if you can’t walk well with the foot soldiers how will you run with the horsemen”.
1 Jn. 2:14 "because you are strong and the word of God abides in you and you have overcome the wicked one." If we continually abide we are being built up and our spiritual muscles are developed.
1 John 5:3-5 "For whatever is born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world--our faith. Who is he who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the of God? "
Eph 6:10-18 "Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might. 11Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. 12For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. 13Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. 14Stand therefore, having girded your waist with truth, having put on the breastplate of righteousness, 15and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace; 16above all, taking the shield of faith with which you will be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked one. 17And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God; 18praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, being watchful to this end with all perseverance and supplication for all the saints."
The armor of God in Eph.6 speaks of Christ and the Scripture. We are to be completely dressed for battle not going in with just a few pieces but be fully dressed every day. Be strong in the Lord and the power of his might. Notice it is in him we are fortified not in ourselves. All these components are necessary for a soldier to be victorious in battle.V.11 "put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the Devil." He repeats our ability to stand that shows the weight of importance. V.13 "Take up the whole armor of God’ - to be aware of the strategies of the enemy. That you may be able to stand in that evil day. What evil day? (which day? The one when the Satan is attacking with temptations, the one you’re being assaulted in). V.14 Again "stand therefore" The wrestling in this passage is not to engage in the same activity we would with man except its with spirit. There are no spinning or body slams or death blows to demons. We fight by standing and resist is the key element by having the truth exalted over lies 1Pt.5:8 We speak the written word in our heart (Logos) or out loud if necessary. Which then becomes the ‘rhema," the word used for its immediate application.
Paul invokes the image of a Roman soldier relating to us an everyday picture of the 1st century Roman soldier ready to go into battle against an enemy. He is trying to give us the view of a real battle against an enemy that is trying to influence our lives. As the Roman soldiers went into battle they would not break rank and lock shield to shield advancing on the enemy. This tactic made them invincible in moving ahead in the battle. The Roman armor was used metaphorically of our spiritual armor as Christians. Some of the pieces of the Roman armor are omitted such as the lance. As Christians most of our battle in warfare is fought separately in our own private lives when their is no one around. God is concerned with our character as individuals
THE ARMOR OF GOD IS UNDERSTANDING AND APPLYING SCRIPTURE
1) The belt of Truth- Having an attitude of honesty and integrity, truth. Which is the Word and Jesus. This is our foundation, everything a Christian does is to be based on truth which is the Word applied in our lives. Knowledge applied = wisdom. The enemy cannot move us into his ways if we walk in truth. One must have the word in them to be ready to be used in any given situation that would be contrary to God’s ways.
2) The Breastplate of Righteousness- our protective gear. This protects our vital organs. Satan attacks this area often by condemning us for not being righteous. We are standing on his merit and work not our own. No one can be righteous on their own It is Christ’s righteousness we are clothed in (Isa.59:17, Phil.3:9, 2 Cor.5:21) We are positionally righteous, however we are daily conformed to the of God making us holy in a practical sense. If we do what is required of us even when we fail, the enemy cannot put a guilt trip on us. If we rest on Christ’s merits, His grace we don’t have to punish ourselves for failing.
3) Feet that are ready to go bring the gospel of peace- Speaks of our servanthood to our Lord, dying to self-motives and living for His will. The Roman soldiers had special sandals that gave them security on the battlefield. This relates to Rom.10:15 How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the Gospel of peace who bring glad tidings of good things." This is one reason why none of this has anything to do with binding and loosing. We don’t bring the gospel to anyone but those who are in need of salvation. There is no witnessing to fallen angels. (Isa.52) We are to make the Gospel our ownership as Paul said according to my Gospel. We are ambassadors of Christ to have people make peace with God. (2 Cor.5:18-21).
4) The Shield of faith- Is our protection from the fiery darts (flaming arrows) of the enemy. This was a large shield big enough to protect the whole body. All the thoughts he sends prompts us to sin, and when we sin he brings condemnation making us think we cannot approach God because he won’t forgive us. Trusting in Christ- know that he is with us interceding on our behalf. That his promises are true and we should not let the lies of the enemy touch us.(Gen.15:1-6) Learn to face the shield in the right direction. This means to stand toward the enemy not turn your back. If you train yourself to trust when you see no way human way possible the enemy will not be able to have his seeds of doubt and despair take root, they will fall off your shield.
5) The Helmet of Salvation- Knowing where we came from and where we are going, a guaranteed future. It is to protect our minds with knowing we are in him and in the faith. If we are unsure in the mind it will affect our walk and battle. This is often attacked by condemnation from the enemy who makes us question our salvation or not being good enough. Having the correct knowledge of our relationship deters any questions that arise and bring on guilt.(Isa.59:17) We stand in the Gospel and his truth.
6) The sword of the Spirit -which is our defensive weapon to win in the battles. To remember his promises and word that is applicable to our immediate situation. God’s eternal truths are to be put alongside anything questionable or contrary to demolish arguments that masquerade as spiritual truths. The Word which can cut and expose everything (Heb. 4:12) will do its ministry in our lives if we use it skillfully and in faith. When we are challenged by the philosophies and culture of the world today it is the word that corrects. We have the whole word of God available for any and all situations. We are to be in the word daily to fight the battle that may come at any time. If you are an anemic reader and have a low understanding you will have a defeated walk. We must apply the knowledge we take in and walk in it.
7) Praying with all types of prayer- for others and ourselves being ready to request the Lord at the drop of a pin so that we do not rely on our own strength. This is our defense and if anyone tells you not to pray or not to be in a attitude of prayer, that’s exactly what you need to do. The solution Mt.26:41 "watch and pray lest you enter into temptation, prayerlessness is powerlessness it is the quick road to defeat. We must be in the attitude of prayer a training that makes us God dependent. There are all types of different prayers for our petitioning God. The terms may change but the principle stays the same, God being the focus and we being dependent on him.
Summary
I. Put on the whole armor each day. (Eph. 6:11-1 This is done by reading the word and knowing Christ and applying His teachings. When we stand in Christ we are victorious. He fights for us as we are steadfast in him.
2. Be sober and vigilant against Satan and his wiles. (2 Peter 5:8-9) Be aware of the enemy and his attacks as well as distractions.
3. Give Satan no place. (Eph. 4:27; James 4) fight his temptations as soon as they are discovered in thought. Know Satan's devices, his schemes and goal to deceive. (2 Cor. 2:11) Avoid areas you know you are weak in, train yourself to concentrate on Christ and his word.
4. We Overcome Satan by standing on the word of God and in the Spirits power who strengthens our weaknesses. (Matt.1:11; I Jn. 2:14)
5. We Overcome Satan by the blood of Jesus and our testimony. (Rev. 12:11) We cannot be removed if we hold onto Christ by faith. Be assured of what took place in your life, as well as Christ’s promise to cleanse.
6. We Overcome Satan in the name of Jesus Christ and his merits. (Eph. 2:20-22) Our position in Christ brings us the victory.
7. Watch and pray that you do not enter into temptation. (Mt. 28:41; Mt. 6:13) We are to walk circumspectly knowing the evil around us that can influence and affect our spiritual life.
8. Know your position in Christ, don’t go on experiences for your spiritual walk. Walk by what he has said not by what he has not said.
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
Cure for the Common Life
|
Posted:Feb 11, 2011 5:17 am
Last Updated:May 4, 2024 3:53 am 1809 Views
|
Cure for the Common Life, by author Max Lucado, is a book about “living in your sweet spot.” Lucado tells readers in chapter one to “[h]eed that inner music,” and quoting mystic Martin Buber from his book, The Way of Man (a book on Jewish mysticism), Lucado tells readers they each have a “divine spark.” Buber had panentheistic affinities as he embraced the teachings of Hasidism (Jewish mysticism) and believed that this divine spark that Lucado refers to is in every human being and every part of creation.
Through Lucado’s book he quotes other mystics and contemplatives: Saint Thomas Aquinas,Thomas Merton, Eugene Peterson and Richard Foster. It is Thomas Merton who said,
It is a glorious destiny to be a member of the human race,… now I realize what we all are…. If only they [people]could all see themselves as they really are … I suppose the big problem would be that we would fall down and worship each other…. At the center of our being is a point of nothingness which is untouched by sin and by illusions, a point of pure truth…. This little point … is the pure glory of God in us. It is in everybody.
Merton and Buber shared this belief that everyone has a divine spark. When Max Lucado quotes men of these persuasions, telling readers they each have a “sweet spot” then referring to a divine spark in everyone, this is very confusing and will leave the unaware spiritual seeker believing him.
Cure for the Common Life has drawn endorsements from an assortment of Christian leaders, and their names sit on the front inside covers of Lucado’s book as well as on the back cover. New Age sympathizer Ken Blanchard says of the book, “Max Lucado has done it again! He has taken simple truths and made them available to all of us (emphasis mine). Richard Foster says, “I’m so glad for Max Lucado’s insightful call for us to live and work as we are intrinsically designed by God.” Sheila Walsh said that the “message of this book could change your life forever.” Bob Coy (Calvary Chapel Fort Lauderdale) and Bob Buford (creator of the emerging church) also gave raving reviews of the book. On the back cover, New Age sympathizer Laurie Beth Jones says, “This book can cure whatever ‘blah’ that ails you!” In Jones book, Teach Your Team to Fish, she states: “I have been challenged by the concept of meditation … I decided recently to accept the invitation of a friend to experience the sheer silence of meditation-undirected prayer. … I had before only sensed intellectually … But by going deep into prayer I could almost feel it.” (p. 142.)
Lucado seems to be coming out of the contemplative closet. Recently he was featured on the Be Still DVD, along with Richard Foster and Beth Moore. In that DVD, Lucado emphasized the importance of contemplative prayer, saying “It’s nothing mystical, necessarily. It’s nothing secretive. It’s just what we do with our body we do with our soul.” But Richard Foster would probably disagree – contemplative is mystical, and in many ways is very secretive.
Christian leaders with contemplative and New Age sympathies are not the only ones who love Cure for the Common Life. Barnes and Noble bookstores recently began a New Age-promoting project called East West that is “a resource for conscious living. It opens doors to self-discovery, higher awareness and true understanding.” Under the best sellers list are five titles, one of them being Lucado’s book Cure For the Common Life. This is what East West says of Lucado’s book:
According to New York Times bestselling author Max Lucado, you were designed as a one-of-a-kind to achieve one God-given purpose. And embedded in your soul are the power and passion to fulfill it. As Dr. Phil McGraw writes, “Cure for the Common Life can help you find that uniqueness that puts it all in perspective, and show you how to live it every day so that you aren’t just existing in God’s creation but thriving in His plan.”
Apparently, those with New Age persuasions admire Lucado’s “divine spark” in everyone idea. And why not. That’s what the New Age is really all about. But the questions must be asked, Why is Thomas Nelson publishing another book that promotes New Age ideas (see their book Yoga for Christians, 2006), and is this book going to be carried in Christian bookstores and churches and considered another worthy book for Sunday school classes?
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
Mans' Megladons
|
Posted:Feb 4, 2011 4:06 am
Last Updated:May 4, 2024 3:53 am 1824 Views
|
Its a long way home from LA. Long time to hang in the sky. Its a long way home to.............
You will never hear me state that there is any other God. Any other savior than Jesus Christ. Nor will I ever state that one Church organization is the only true Church. That is definitely a red flag. If you hear a group claim they are the only true church of "Jesus Christ" you have found a cult. Better move on or get assimilated into their nonsense. Paul warned about other Jesus's that would be preached.
For the first 330 years after Christ gave atonement the body of believers in the Christ met in peoples homes. In most cases many times a week. It had its big issues as the Jews who believed upon him were ostracized and had to learn to embrace the Grace of the new covenant and walk away from the legalism they had been in. The Gentiles had to overcome humanistic beliefs as well as other idols. There has always been a polluted road to walk around to find the truth.
The truth is simplistic. The Trinity, salvation by faith and not works. Abiding in Christ which means to allow him to live through you. Intimacy with the Holy Spirit as he comforts and teaches you. Sharing this simplicity with others. That about sums it up. Teaching others to rely upon the Holy Spirit. Yep that is it
The megladons always teach Jesus plus something else. In many cases the Jesus they talk about is not the Jesus of the trinity..for the Mormons and Seventh Day Adventists...Jesus is the Arc Angel Michael. Wrong. The Jehovah's witnesses believe Christians are satanists and that they are the only true group. These three groups are all less than 200 years old. They all come from people who were totally whacked out, that somehow created a following. The Bible, lest we let that get in the way; states that if a person wrongly prophecies once, they are no prophet. In Ellen Whites case with the SDA, you could put out a short story essay on all of her false prophecies. I guess it is ok if you are one of the formers.
The Mormons believe God was once a man, and eventually they themselves will eventually become little God's themselves.
Do you remember what happened when Moses was gone to fetch the 10 commandments? I do. The people lost focus. They apparently became bored with their God and they made a golden calf to worship. I do not think God was real happy with what they did if i remember. Do you remember?
It is like God saying I am wheat bread. Each day take and eat, because this will bring life. Well someone gets the idea to add rye to the wheat. So what does that mean? It means the pure wheat is no longer wheat. It is altered from its true being. Funny thing about truth. It is said to set you free. So what does an altered truth bring? Bondage, not truth.
Today we have so many people caught up in mixing mysticism, and new age to the wheat bread. It is no longer Godly despite what people may think. What does the bible say that the leaven when added to the bread will produce? It ruins the loaf. It ruins what God is trying to do in our lives. All of a sudden the focus is no longer really on God, as to who he is. It is on the added ingredients meant to spice it up.
God doesnt want to be sensationalized. He wants a relationship. The truest of relationship is to accept him as being the wheat that he is. Sad part is we want him to accept us as we are and yet we listen to every whim instead of the simplicity that is found in a real relationship of love with him.
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
Picking and Choosing
|
Posted:Feb 3, 2011 4:07 am
Last Updated:May 4, 2024 3:53 am 1772 Views
|
in plain site
Which then leaves out the vast majority of the laws of the Old Testament and the question of what we are supposed to make of them. Are any or all of them applicable to the Christian world? And if so, how are we supposed to decide which, if any, are still in effect. What criteria is to be used in making the determination as to which of the laws we follow and which of them we ignore.
There are usually two main schools of thought on the subject.
Some Christians will tell you that the Ten Commandments are timeless moral laws which apply to all Christians for all time, while the rest of the law is not applicable to Christians today.
Others have endeavored to rationalize their beliefs about which of the laws are to be obeyed by making a distinction between ceremonial, civil and moral laws, the last category supposedly the only one that is still to be observed.
Lets take a rational look at each of these viewpoints..
Ten Commandments Only?
If the Ten Commandments are the only Old Testament laws valid for today, we immediately run across the problem of Jesus identifying the second greatest commandment as being “You Shall Love Your Neighbor As Yourself”, which was a direct quote from the laws of Leviticus 19:18. If Jesus said one of the OT laws, outside of the Ten Commandments, was the second greatest commandment ever, then we have absolutely no basis for arbitrarily rejecting all the regulations in the Pentateuch. Inclusion in the tablets of stone can not be the sole criterion for our decision.
In any case, if the Ten Commandments are valid for today, most of the Christian church is in violation of the fourth commandment which, by the way, was clearly a ceremonial, not a moral law.
Observe the Sabbath day by keeping it holy, as the LORD your God has commanded you [1] (Deuteronomy 5:12).
Keeping the Sabbath
The Sabbath is universally defined as Saturday and setting forth the reasons as to why Sunday worship is appropriate is not even necessary, since virtually no one keeps the Sabbath anyway. The Sabbath commandments regulate much more than just the day of formal worship. Starting at sundown on Friday until the appearance of three stars in the sky on Saturday night, the Sabbath severely limits what can be done on that day… The very term "Sabbath" derives from the Hebrew Shabbat which means "to cease". How many people cease from all work that is forbidden on Shabbat?
But the question has to be asked… Why only the Sabbath? There is absolutely nothing in Scripture to distinguish the Ten Commandments from the rest of the Old Testament laws, and the Sabbath from the other six Feasts that the Jews were beholden to keep (all seven are listed in Leviticus 23). In fact, they were all called "the feasts of the Lord" which simply means that they were instituted by the Lord Himself, a fact that lends them much solemnity and importance. They were “holy convocations” that took place at "appointed times". [See The Seven Feasts of Israel]
However keeping the Festivals of the Old Covenant is not quite as simple as it sounds. In the words of pastor Tim Warner…
Lets get one thing straight right up front. Keeping the Feasts according to the Torah Requires Offering Animal Sacrifices. There is no avoiding this conclusion. And, any changes to the festivals by rabbis to accommodate the fact that there is no longer a Temple or Levitical priesthood, or, any changes by Messianic Christians to accommodate the fact that the New Testament says Christ's sacrifice has ended the Animal sacrifices, makes it impossible to observe these feasts according to the Torah. What we are left with is a lot of man-made tradition as a substitute to what God commanded. Some of these traditions include things like substituting eggs for the Passover lamb on the Seder. How is this any different from people using "Easter eggs?" Synagogue worship on Sabbath was never commanded by God. According to the Torah, all males must travel to Jerusalem 3 times a year to worship on the festival seasons. That was the worship God commanded in the Torah. No Jew or Messianic Christian on earth observes the feasts according to the Torah. And, there is a very good reason for this. The Temple was destroyed exactly 40 years [one generation] after Jesus began preaching, and the Levitical priesthood, which is necessary to observe the festivals, has been lost. So, how do Jews and Messianic Christians observe the feasts instead? Simply by following man's traditions, established by rabbis who flatly rejected Jesus as the Messiah. [Pastor Tim Warner. Should Christians Celebrate the Jewish Feasts?]
Modern Judaism takes the opinion of man more seriously than Torah. Since the temple was destroyed, and with it all the rituals that revolved around the building including Animal sacrifices, the Rabbis, elevated to the status of prophet, decided that prayer ranks higher than sacrifices. They decided that “one who puts on phylacteries, recites the Shema, and offered prayer to God would be regarded as having sacrificed upon the great altar”. [See Judaism And The Atonement]
Ceremonial, Civil And Moral Laws?
Those that believe that the content of the law is the criterion by which we make our decision as to which of the Mosaic laws are valid for today, also run into huge problems. For starters it has to be noted that no such distinction occurs in Scripture…. they have been imposed on the text from outside the text. In any case deciding which category many of the laws fall into, is not as easy as some may think. Any one who gives the matter some thought will realize that the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments is not a moral law but very clearly a ceremonial one… moral and ceremonial commandments often found mixed together in the Old Testament. Also consider…
Jesus identified Leviticus 19:18 (“You Shall Love Your Neighbor As Yourself”) as the second greatest commandment ever. However this verse was directly followed by the commands to not breed together two kinds of your cattle, nor sow fields with two kinds of seed, nor wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" (19:19). Yet many have decided that verse 18 is a timeless moral law, therefore applicable to 21st century Christianity, while commandments in the very next verse are civil law and therefore can be rejected.
However, while instructions on sowing your field may sound like a civil law, it really wasn’t. In the words of J. Daniel Hays …
“One of the central themes running throughout Leviticus is the holiness of God. The discourse by God in Leviticus 19 is prefaced by the commandment, “Be holy because I, the Lord your God, am holy.” Part of this theme is the teaching that holy things must be kept separate from profane things. While the significance of these commands against mixing seed or mixing cloth material may not be fully understood, it is clear that they relate back to the holiness of God. In fact all of the levitical laws regarding separation seem to relate to the overarching principle of God’s holiness and the separation required because of that holiness. How then can this law not be moral?” [1]
Besides which, the “moral law” of the Old Testament extend well beyond the Ten Commandments. There are commandments that order adulterers, fornicators, homosexuals and those who dishonor their parents to be put to death. For example..
If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother, and his blood will be on his own head. If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death (Leviticus 20:9-10. See also 11-16).
So, when was the last time you heard of an adulterer being given the death sentence in the modern day church?
All of which makes me wonder why it is that you can read a thousand articles on a thousand different websites and blogs about all the reasons that the author believes Jesus did not abolish the law, yet you do not read one where the author claims to follow the whole law. I have wondered how many of these articles were written after a bacon breakfast!
Without giving the matter sufficient thought and study, we are picking and choosing which of the Old Testament laws we will and will not obey based merely on whether a law seems to be relevant. The fact of the matter is that the laws of the Old Covenant are…
A Unified Whole
Behold, I Paul say unto you, that, if ye receive circumcision, Christ will profit you nothing. Yea, I testify again to every man that receiveth circumcision, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. [Galatians 5:2-3]
In the words of Jason Dulle… [Emphasis Added]
The most prevalent view of the Law is that it is divided up into three categories: moral law, civil law, and ceremonial law. Although this way of viewing the Law may be beneficial for facilitating our mental categorization of the many laws, the concept is foreign to the Scripture. The Law of Moses was never fragmented into various parts, but was always viewed as one cohesive, unified whole. One had to keep all 613 commandments of the Law to receive of its benefits (Galatians 3:10-12). Moses said "cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them" (Deuteronomy 27:26) The Lord said through Jeremiah, "Cursed be the man that obeyeth not the words of this covenant, ...Obey my voice, and do them, according to all which I command you" (Jeremiah 11:3-4; See also Galatians 3:10). James summed it up best when he said, "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all" (James 2:10; See also v. 11). The Scripture declares that to keep 612 commandments, and yet fail to keep one, is to break all 613. To break a "ceremonial" law was viewed in the same manner as a "moral" law. Perfect obedience was demanded to all the commands of the covenant, because it was a unified whole. [Read Article]
Which doesn’t find us in a very good position since Scripture declares that to keep 612 commandments, and yet fail to keep one, is to break all 613. We can not pick and choose which of the Old Testament laws we will obey and which we will not. If present-day Christendom is bound by the Ten Commandments, all Old Testament law should be obeyed, which includes the Animal sacrifices, and all seven feasts, including the thrice yearly visits to Jerusalem.
Yet it is impossible to keep all the laws which, we need to remember, were given to a very small nation, the sheer smallness of which made possible the physical keeping of some of the laws. Once Peter took the Gospel to the Gentiles, and it began to spread to the furtherest corners of the earth, many of the laws became impossible to keep, becoming even more unworkable as the number of Christians mushroomed.
For example If God intended the Animal sacrifices to continue, why in the world did He let the Temple be destroyed? However even if the Temple were still standing and in Jewish hands, how long do you think it would be before the sheer weight of numbers of Christians converging on Jerusalem three times a year, would make the Israeli authorities throw up their hands in horror and shut down the airports. Chaos doesn’t even begin to describe the situation.
However there are several passages in the Old Testament that indicate that the Law, including the Ten Commandments and the Sabbath were given only to the nation of Israel, and that only at a certain point in their history (For instance, no mention is made of any of the patriarchs keeping the Sabbath) as the following verses illustrate...
The State of Israel Vs. Worldwide Christianity
And now, O Israel, hearken unto the statutes and unto the ordinances, which I teach you, to do them; that ye may live, and go in and possess the land which Jehovah, the God of your fathers, giveth you… For what great nation is there, that hath a god so nigh unto them, as Jehovah our God is whensoever we call upon him? And what great nation is there, that hath statutes and ordinances so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day? [Deuteronomy 4:1, 7-8]
And this is the law which Moses set before the of Israel: these are the testimonies, and the statutes, and the ordinances, which Moses spake unto the of Israel, when they came forth out of Egypt, [Deuteronomy 4: 44-45]
And Moses called unto all Israel, and said unto them, Hear, O Israel, the statutes and the ordinances which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and observe to do them. [Deuteronomy 5:1]
And Jehovah said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel. [Exodus 34:27,28]
There was nothing in the ark save the two tables of stone which Moses put there at Horeb, when Jehovah made a covenant with the of Israel, when they came out of the land of Egypt. [1 Kings 8:9]
And thou shalt remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and Jehovah thy God brought thee out thence by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm: therefore Jehovah thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day. [Deuteronomy 5:15]
The last verse above makes clear that the Sabbath is not applicable to New Testament Christians, at least not to those who are Gentiles. Neither we, nor our ancestors, were slaves in Egypt rescued by God’s mighty hand and his outstretched arm. Moses first states that God delivered the Jews (Israelites) from Egypt, therefore (or because of that) God commanded the Israelites to observe the Sabbath Day.
Also
“Many commandments deal with situations only found in an agricultural community, including what to do about dangerous Animals (Exodus 21:28-32, 35-36), uncovered pits (21:33-34), and fires in fields (22:6)”. [2]
Besides which, several of the authors of the New Testament are pretty clear that the law was a curse we have been redeemed from.
The New Testament and The Law
This is particularly evident in the book of Galatians, which is almost exclusively devoted to the question of whether Christians should keep the Law of Moses, or the Old Covenant. While Paul expressly declared that he himself kept the law, saying in his defense... “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar, have I sinned at all." Acts 25: he was at the same time pretty emphatic that we were no long under the law..
Galatians: A few verses from Galatians have been quoted below, see Footnote 1 for others.
For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: [Galatians 3:10-13]
But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. For ye are all the of God by faith in Christ Jesus. [Galatians 3:22-26]
But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain. [Galatians 4:9-11]
But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. [Galatians 5:18]
Hebrews: The author of Hebrews certainly agreed
In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin you had no pleasure. Then I said, 'Behold, I have come-- in the volume of the book it is written of Me-- to do Your will, O God.' " Previously saying, "Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them" (which are offered according to the law), then He said, "Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God." He takes away the first that He may establish the second. [Hebrews 10:6-9]
But the Holy Spirit also witnesses to us; for after He had said before, "This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them," then He adds, "Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more." Now where there is remission of these, there is no longer an offering for sin. Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh, (Hebrews 10:15-20 NKJV)
Peter: convinced by the vision, recorded in Acts 10, that God had pulled down the middle wall of partition that had so long separated the Jews and Gentiles, ate with the latter, evidently disregarding the dietary laws of the Jews. However when certain Jews came from Jerusalem he withdrew from the Gentiles and appeared to be enforcing the distinction between the Jews and Gentiles. (Apparently Jewish rites were observed for some period of time by those Jews who became Christians). However Peter was actually chided by Paul, not for eating with the Gentiles but for compelling the Gentiles to live as Jews, although he knew that a man is not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ [V.16]
“But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews? [Galatians 2:11-14]
Ephesians: In the verses immediately preceding the one quoted next, Paul talks about what Christ has done for us, salvation is by grace.. a gift of God, not by anything we have done. He then goes on to speak of the Gentiles who were called the uncircumcision and were separated from Christ (Vs. 11-12), emphasizing the fact that The Law, which was what separated Jew from Gentile is no longer in effect. That Jesus had abolished in his flesh the enmity which formed the barrier between Jews and Gentiles and through him we both have our access in one Spirit unto the Father (V. 1.
For he is our peace, who made both one, and brake down the middle wall of partition, having abolished in the flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; that he might create in himself of the two one new man, so making peace; [Ephesians 2:14-15]
Colossians: Paul gets a little more precise in Colossians 2:14, 16, where he specifies that since the ordinances were nailed to the cross, no one was under obligation to observe the dietary laws, the Sabbaths etc.
having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and he hath taken it out that way, nailing it to the cross; … Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a feast day or a new moon or a Sabbath day:
However the entire issue has been rendered far more complicated by the fact that the verses quoted above seem to flatly contradict statements made by Jesus Himself.
Jesus and The Law
Jesus not only kept all the Jewish feasts and observances but also instructed his disciples to obey the law saying
“The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses seat: all things therefore whatsoever they bid you, these do and observe: but do not ye after their works; for they say, and do not. [Matthew 23:2-3]
As He did on at least one other occasion. When (in Luke 25) Jesus was asked by a lawyer what he had to do to inherit eternal life, he answered with another question.. “What is written in the law?”. When the man correctly answered Jesus said "Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live" (Vs. 27, 2. In fact, the Jews were unable to convict Jesus of any transgression of the law (John 8: 46).
Added to this is Jesus’ unambiguous Jot and Tittle statement in Matthew 5:17-18, which says not one iota of the law will ever pass away…
A Jot Or A Tittle
Jesus began His Sermon on the Mount with the Beatitudes, which began with a description of the characteristics of those who will inherit the kingdom of heaven, or be “blessed”. But then, in verse 17, He changes the focus very slightly when He says..
Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:17-19).
I have heard and read much speculation about what commandments Jesus was talking about in verse 19. However the context leaves no room for guesswork… The chapter begins with Jesus talking about the law and the prophets, and nothing indicates that He wasn’t still doing so. The law and the prophets is however one of two expressions that may need clarification.
The Law And The Prophets: The Hebrew Bible is called the Tanakh, which is an acronym formed from the initial Hebrew letters of the three traditional subdivisions: The Torah ("Teaching," or the Five Books of Moses), Nevi'im ("Prophets") and Ketuvim ("Writings"). However the term The Law and the Prophets was a common expression used by the Jews to refer to the entire Old Testament. [See for example Matthew 7:12; 11:13; 22:40; Luke 16:16; John 1:45; Acts 13:15; 28:23 and Romans 3:21). In other words Jesus was talking about the Old Testament as a whole, calling once again to mind that there is no basis for making any distinction between Israel's civil, moral and ceremonial laws.
Jot Or Tittle: Jesus further emphasized this fact when He said that not one jot nor tittle (a proverbial mode of expression among the Jews) would pass away from the law until all things be accomplished. The word “jot,” or yod, is the smallest letter in the Hebrew alphabet, while the word tittle in the Greek means something horn like or, more specifically, the apex of a Hebrew letter. A change of any of these might vary the meaning of a word, and destroy the sense.
Interestingly the Greek word translated abolish has been used three other times in Matthew, all of which refer to the destruction of the Temple. [24:2, 26:61, 27:40].
Jesus’ statements that He had not come to abolish (or destroy) the law or the prophets and that the tiniest part of the law will not pass away until all things be accomplished, suggests that the binding nature of the law of Moses will remain forever in effect. However, as shown, this appears to contradict much of the rest of the New Testament.
So Did Jesus Abolish The Law Or Didn’t He?
The answer is actually .. both!
However an understanding of just what it was that Jesus abolished, and what it is that will endure until Heaven and Earth pass away, is impossible without a basic grasp of two very important factors… a) The fascinating subject of Types and Antitypes, and b) An overall pictures of what Jesus was saying in a key chapter of the Gospels... Matthew 5.
Types and Antitypes:
Why are we forgetting that much of the Old Testament was but a shadow of something to come or a type, which in Christian theology is a factual happening in history that is a glimpse of one or more actual events yet to come... the significance of the original event not always apparent at the original occurrence. Certainly the historic and prophetic significance of the Seven Feasts of Israel is one of the most fascinating studies in Scripture. While believers are not require to keep these feasts, every believer should be very familiar with them, as they not only celebrate a historical event in Israel's past, but are, at the same time, a prophecy of future events… or a type. [See The Feasts of Israel].
The laws were certainly no exception, being but a precursor of things to come..
While Scripture informs us that the New Covenant is not based on new law, but on the same law given to Moses in the Old Testament….
"But 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." [Jeremiah 31:33]
The transition was made from a mere letter-of-the-law, minimal standards approach, to understanding and obeying the spiritual intent behind the law, accomplished with the aid of the Holy Spirit. We are now living under the New Covenant which actually demands a higher degree of holiness and obedience to God.
Note that while the exact terms the spirit of the law and the letter of the law are not found in Scripture, the phrase spirit of the law is used to refer to God's original intent or purpose behind each law, while the letter of the law refers to obeying the literal interpretation of the words (the "letter") of the law, but not the intent of Him who wrote the law. These terms have been derived from 2 Corinthians 3: 6-7, where Paul directly refers to the Ten Commandments, calling it a ministry of death. [Emphasis Added]
who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was, how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory? [2 Corinthians 3: 6-7]
And how do we know that any such transition was ever made? By closely studying the words of Jesus in…
Matthew 5.. The Face-Off
The overall focus of the book of Matthew was to connect Jesus to the history of Israel. Matthew quoted from or alluded to more Old Testament prophecies than any other book of the New Testament, citing in the first four chapters, no less than seven Old Testament prophecies that were fulfilled by Jesus of Nazareth. (See Matthew 1:22,23; 2:5,6; 2:15; 2:17,18; 2:23; 3:3; 4:14-16).
The Sermon on the Mount is the first of five extended discourses or teachings by Jesus in this Gospel, a delivery that took place in the very early stages of Jesus’ ministry. Both Matthew 5 and Matthew 13 clearly show that Jesus was in out-and-out opposition to the Scribes and Pharisees, which could have resulted in Him being accused of intending to destroy the law. He was therefore, at the very outset of His time, clearly stating what it was that He had come to do… to fulfill and not to destroy.
In many ways, Matthew 5 was a face-off between Jesus and the Scribes and Pharisees… the latter believed by historians to be the spiritual fathers of modern Judaism. There is no doubt that at one time the Pharisees were the most rigid defenders of Jewish traditions, even suffering martyrdom during the persecutions of Antiochus which, in part, led to their having great influence on the people. In the course of time they, instead of the priests, became the sources of authority. However the Pharisees were distinguished by strict observance of the traditional and written law, looking to a scrupulous outward obedience to God’s law in order to merit blessing, all the while bragging that they were not sinners like other men. They did a great job at keeping the letter of the Law, but ignored the spirit of it, often justifying themselves by twisting or even altering God’s commands, and introducing hundreds of rules and prohibitions of their own which were their interpretation of God’s law. Their exaggerated formalism, which insisted on ceremonial details at the expense of the more important precepts of the Law was, in fact, a perversion of God’s laws.
In other words they practiced a vending-machine type of religion in which if they pushed the right buttons (prayer, alms, fasting etc.), God would dispense his blessings to them.
However these religious leaders were considered to be the epitome of righteousness and piety, and it must have shocked many people when Jesus told them that their righteousness had to surpass that of the Scribes and Pharisees (Matthew 5:20). (Actually Jesus is quite subtle in His dealing with the Pharisees in Matthew 5, especially when compared to His more than blunt words in Matthew 23, when He pronounced seven woes on them, called them “hypocrites!” and referred to them as “whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness”).
Beginning in the second half of Matthew 5, Jesus zeroed in on the spirit of the Law, considerably raising the bar. Jesus quoted several of God’s commandments showing how the scribes and Pharisees interpreted and outwardly obeyed each law, and then revealed what was God’s true intent in each case. He began each example with the words.. "You have heard that it was said … But I say to you …”
Note that these words did NOT mean that Jesus was abolishing His Father’s laws and instituting His own. He and His Father were in perfect harmony as shown in John 10:30, where Jesus said, "I and My Father are one". And in John 5:30, where Jesus said: "I can of Myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is righteous, because I do not seek My own will but the will of the Father who sent Me." [All Emphasis added].
Pay close attention to His words.
Had Jesus been referring to Scripture, he likely would have used the phrase It is written, instead of it was said. The former phrase being more often used to introduce Scripture, while the latter is far more appropriate to unwritten Jewish tradition. For example… In His confrontation with Satan in Matthew 4, Jesus bases His answers to Satan’s temptations on passages of Scripture, using the word gegraptai, "It is written".
We know that Jesus did not set himself against the law of Moses (the Law and Prophets), a fact that He had just stated in the clearest of terms. What Jesus was setting Himself up against was the false and destructive interpretations and erroneous understanding of the law prevalent in his time, as amply demonstrated in Matthew 5:43 which has Jesus saying…
"You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.'"
In this verse, Jesus is referring to Leviticus 19:18, which simply states “thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself”. The hate your enemy bit was never part of God's law, but assumed to be the natural sequel to loving your neighbour, therefore apparently taught as law.
Four examples in Matthew 5 (verses 21, 27, 33, 43) were directly centered on the commandments. In the first, Jesus expanded the meaning of the sixth commandment "thou shall not kill" (Exodus 20:13; Deuteronomy 5:17), telling us that even whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. Prior to this, unjustified negative feeling towards another human being was acceptable as long as one did not actually commit murder. However since murder, like all sin, begins in the human mind, Jesus was addressing the adverse emotion behind the deed and calling it wrong (Vs. 21-26). The apostle John elaborates on this "Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him." [1 John 3:15].
Note that thou shall not kill is better translated, You shall do no murder.
Since the Old Testament laws only forbade the actual act of adultery, the spirit of the law was ignored and lusting would not have been considered as a violation of the law. However, Jesus, once again getting to the heart of the matter, said that even looking at a woman with desire constituted adultery (Vs. 27-30). It is one thing never to commit adultery, but quite another to control lust in the heart and mind. He also came down hard [Vs. 31-32] on their lax approach to marriage, which quite literally gave people permission to divorce, replacing their anything-goes version with just one justifiable reason to break the marriage covenant.
Note on Modern Day Pharisees: Unfortunately the 21st century also has it’s fair share of Pharisees, who see no further than the actual words on paper and have no idea what God’s intent behind His laws are. These Pharisees are divided on the divorce issue, one camp insisting that in spite of Jesus’ clear words, even adultery is not justifiable grounds for divorce, while the second camp insists that ONLY adultery is. However all this legal wrangling does not take into account several other reasons a person may justifiably seek divorce... Abuse for one. It is hard to believe that anyone in their right mind would imagine that God would actually condemn a person seeking divorce under these circumstances. Again, it bears repeating that Jesus was reprimanding a casual anything goes approach to the marriage covenant. Unfortunately most of the reasons behind divorces today fall into the category Jesus would condemn.
Similarly, beginning in verse 43, Jesus instructed his listeners to love their enemies and pray for those who persecute them, repudiating the commonly held belief that hating one's enemies was lawful and acceptable. [See Deuteronomy 23:3-6]
These examples, encompassing even our thoughts toward others, served to show the intent of the law extended far beyond the exact wording… that perfect obedience to the law took place in thought, word, and deed, a fundamental shift in theology that was first introduced in Matthew 4:17, which says "From that time Jesus began to preach and to say, 'Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand". Repent, translated from the Greek metanoia, means a complete change of mind and emphasizes the idea of a radical change in one's attitude toward sin and God. [See Repentance ...The Missing Message]
The Beatitudes
Remember that Matthew 5 starts with the Beatitudes, which has Jesus saying things like the merciful will receive mercy and the pure in heart will see God. However since it is hardly likely that only the pure in heart will see God, or only the gentle will inherit the earth and only the poor in spirit will gain heaven, it is reasonable to conclude that Jesus was teaching that His followers should manifest all these character traits, and the many blessings promised are different aspects of inheriting God’s kingdom.
However, these blessings were also a direct reversal of the value system of the Pharisees.
When He said, “Blessed are the poor in spirit”, He was challenging (and warning) the arrogant religious leaders who loved “ the place of honor at banquets and the chief seats in the synagogues, and respectful greetings in the market places, and being called Rabbi by men. (Matthew 23: 6-7)
When He said, “Blessed are those who mourn”, one tends to think He was describing heartfelt repentance and remorse over sin (See 2 Corinthians 7:10). The mournful tax collector who humbly bowed his head in the Temple, beating his breast and crying out for God's mercy, was justified, while the Pharisee, who was also praying in the Temple at the same time, and who said… “God, I thank You that I am not like other people: swindlers, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector”... was not. Apparently the scribes and Pharisees didn’t mourn over sin, since in their minds they were already righteous, an attitude Jesus said would be humbled.
In verses 13-16, Jesus uses the analogies of salt and light to further expound on what He expected of His followers. While the Beatitudes described the essential character of His followers, the salt and light metaphors indicate that, from the small handful of Palestinian peasants on, His followers were to be an influence for good in the world.
He warned them to remain salty, preserving their unique characteristics… distinct from the world around them, lest they lose their flavour, fit only to be “thrown out and trampled under foot.” And to remember that .. If it isn’t shining, it isn’t light.
Some Examples of Intent
Behind every Mosaic command lies a principle that transcends time and culture and is therefore applicable to all God’s people, regardless of when or where they live.
“These universal principles will often be related directly to the character of God and His holiness, the nature of sin, the issue of obedience, or concern for other people”. [1]
Which returns us to the afore mentioned commandments in Leviticus 19 about mixing seed etc. which, while they are not fully understood, definitely relate to the holiness of God and the principles of separation. God’s followers are instructed to be Holy as He is Holy [1 Peter 1:16] and therefore separate
"Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you," [2nd Corinthians 6:17].
Other commandments are also difficult to understand and
“…seem to be very strange to us because we do not understand their original context. Why did God forbid the trimming of beards (Leviticus 19:27-28; 21:5) or the cooking of a young goat in its mother's milk (Exodus 23:19; 34:26; Deuteronomy 14:21)? The cutting of beards and hair in this manner (and the closely related disfigurement - Deuteronomy 14:1) was common among the Canaanites. Cutting of the body was practised by the prophets of Baal (1 Kings 18:2. The worship of Yahweh was in no way to be confused with pagan practices. Most commentators point out that the Canaanites practised a fertility rite that required the cooking of a in milk, so this commandment seems to have been intended to outlaw such a practice. Another plausible explanation is that it was considered wrong for a to be cooked in the very medium by which it was previously sustained and nourished. [2]
However it is also noteworthy that some of the Old Testament laws are specifically renewed under the New Covenant. While it may seem a simple matter to locate these laws…. [Emphasis Added]
“…care must be taken to understand the context in which an Old Testament commandment is mentioned in the New. References in the Gospels or Acts are sometimes made to a certain Law simply because it was Jewish practice, and not because it was being renewed by Jesus or the apostles. Jesus' discussion of the practices of the Pharisees is a good example of this (see Matt. 23:23; Luke 11:42). Jesus mentioned tithing in passing as something that the Pharisees did, but there is no evidence elsewhere in the New Testament so suggest that tithing was practiced by the early church or that it was a requirement for Christians. [2]
Jesus and The Spirit of The Sabbath
This new way of thinking and adhering to the laws of God also applied to the Sabbath. The Pharisees had laid down rigid rules as to how the Sabbath was to be kept, making it more of a burden than the blessing it was originally intended to be. So stringent were the rules that they did little but set people up for failure. However the very concept of a day of rest was virtually unknown in ancient times, and the Sabbath was intended to be not only a day of rest and refreshing, but a time to draw closer to God, remembering how He had set them free from slavery in Egypt.
Jesus' insight into the divine purpose behind this day of rest, caused Him not only to heal a man with a withered hand on the Sabbath (Matthew 12:10-12), but even allow his disciples to pick some grain on the Sabbath day. When criticized by the Pharisees, Jesus said, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath" (Mark 2:27). This statement did not mean that man could do what he wished on the Sabbath, but that the institution was made for man’s benefit and was never intended to be kept at his expense.
All of which brings us to one final subject. What did Jesus mean when He said He came to fulfill the law?
Fulfill The Law?
Articles on various aspects of Matthew 5 abound. However the vast majority do mention that Jesus said He came not to destroy, but to fulfill (Greek plēroo) the law, but rarely offer an understandable explanation… probably with good reason, since it does not have a clear cut definition.
The English fulfill, itself has several different shades of meaning as in
o Bring to completion or reality; achieve or realize (something desired, promised, or predicted):
o Carry out (a task, duty, or role) as required, pledged, or expected.
o Satisfy or meet (a requirement, condition, or need):
All of which makes fulfill an ideal translation for plēroo, which is used some 90 times in the New Testament and similarly carries various nuances of meaning. Strong’s Hebrew and Greek Lexicon (G4137) defines plēroo as
to make replete, that is, (literally) to cram (a net), level up (a hollow), or (figuratively) to furnish (or imbue, diffuse, influence), satisfy, execute (an office), finish (a period or task), verify (or coincide with a prediction), etc.: - accomplish, complete, end, expire, fill (up), fulfil, (be, make) full (come), fully preach, perfect, supply.
Although there are several subtle differences in meaning of plēroo, they are all related… this amply demonstrated in the ways the word has been used in the NT. Please note that only one or two examples of each use of the word has been quoted. For a more extensive list see Footnote 2.
1) In the following examples of fulfilled prophecy, it means bring to completion, or bring to reality.
Now all this is come to pass, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, Behold, the virgin shall be with , and shall bring forth a , And they shall call his name Immanuel; which is, being interpreted, God with us. [Matthew 1:22-23]
and was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt did I call my . [Matthew 2:15]
2) The next two examples use plēroo in the sense of literally filling..
Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind: Matthew 13:48 which, when it was filled, they drew up on the beach; and they sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but the bad they cast away. [Matthew 13:47]
And when the day of Pentecost was now come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly there came from heaven a sound as of the rushing of a mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. [Acts 2:1-2]
3) While the following verses use plēroo in the sense of completing or finishing a plan, task or time period.…
After he had ended all his sayings in the ears of the people, he entered into Capernaum. [Luke 7:1]
And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led captive into all the nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. [Luke 21:24]
And when forty years were fulfilled, an angel appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in a flame of fire in a bush. [Acts 7:30]
4) It is also used in the sense of completely or entirely
in the power of signs and wonders, in the power of the Holy Spirit; so that from Jerusalem, and round about even unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ; [Romans 15:19]
5) And it is also used along the lines of being as free as possible from all flaws or defects.. that there be nothing wanting, or lacking…
Be thou watchful, and establish the things that remain, which were ready to die: for I have found no works of thine perfected before my God. [Revelation 3:2. Written to the church at Sardis]
casting down imaginations, and every high thing that is exalted against the knowledge of God, and bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ; and being in readiness to avenge all disobedience, when your obedience shall be made full. [2 Corinthians 10:5-6].
In virtually every case the word in the New Testament was used to mean fill, fill to the fullest, complete, or to finish. Jesus repudiated the Pharisaical obedience to the letter of the law, teaching that it was the principle behind every Mosaic command (or the spirit of the law) that was applicable to all God’s people regardless of when or where they lived. His teachings, far from abolishing Old Testament revelation (the type), carried it forward to it’s intended consummation (the anti-type).
Note: Yet another legitimate translation of plēroo is the English satisfy, which also makes a great deal of sense. Jesus satisfied the law by being the only man who had ever kept it in it’s entirety.
Conclusion
So yes! Jesus did abolish the Old Testament Laws, but He only abolished the literal interpretation of the words, the intent behind them would live forever.
Note however that the intent behind the laws was always the governing factor... the books of Amos and Isaiah providing classic examples…
I hate, I despise your feasts, and I will take no delight in your solemn assemblies. Yea, though ye offer me your burnt-offerings and meal-offerings, I will not accept them; neither will I regard the peace-offerings of your fat beasts. Take thou away from me the noise of thy songs; for I will not hear the melody of thy viols. But let justice roll down as waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream. [Amos 5:21-24]
The people of the time were obviously going through the motions and observing all the physical requirements of the law, but their hearts were far from God. Although they were still offering the burnt-offerings and meal-offerings, the Lord did not see any real righteousness.
Amos 8 tells us that they swallowed up the needy, and caused the poor of the land to fail. They asked when the Sabbath would be finished so they could buy and sell again. They were keeping the Lords festivals with their bodies, not with their minds, and were anxious for the close of the Sabbath so they could cheat on their weights.. making the ephah small, and the shekel great, [increasing the price both ways by paring down the quantity which they sold, and obtaining more silver by fictitious weights]. The also bought the poor for silver, and the needy for a pair of shoes, and sold the refuse of the wheat.
At all this the Lord swore that He would “never forget any of their works”.
Amos and Isaiah prophesized to Israel and Judah respectively… Isaiah following Amos by some 20-30 years. The Bible tells us over and over again that Judah followed in the footsteps of her sister Israel, as is very clear from the words of Isaiah 58:4-14. Here is some of what Isaiah says.. (But take the time to read all the verses).
58:4 Behold, ye fast for strife and contention, and to smite with the fist of wickedness: ye fast not this day so as to make your voice to be heard on high.
58:5 Is such the fast that I have chosen? the day for a man to afflict his soul? Is it to bow down his head as a rush, and to spread sackcloth and ashes under him? wilt thou call this a fast, and an acceptable day to Jehovah?
58:6 Is not this the fast that I have chosen: to loose the bonds of wickedness, to undo the bands of the yoke, and to let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every yoke?
58 Is it not to deal thy bread to the hungry, and that thou bring the poor that are cast out to thy house? when thou seest the naked, that thou cover him; and that thou hide not thyself from thine own flesh?
58:8 Then shall thy light break forth as the morning, and thy healing shall spring forth speedily; and thy righteousness shall go before thee; the glory of Jehovah shall by thy rearward.
58:9 Then shalt thou call, and Jehovah will answer; thou shalt cry, and he will say, Here I am. If thou take away from the midst of thee the yoke, the putting forth of the finger, and speaking wickedly;
So the supposed ‘righteousness’ of going through the motions [traipsing down to the temple to pray and offer sacrifice while oppressing the widow and orphan] spoken of by Amos was just as prevalent in Judah and brought nothing but God’s contempt and anger. It is this sham righteousness, apparently widespread in that day, is what Isaiah called Filthy Rags, addressing a specific situation not, as it is commonly believed, making a generalized statement that applied to all people of all time.
In innumerable statements the writers of the New Testament made it clear that the law of God had not been abandoned and could not be disregarded. However righteousness could not be obtained by a standard that had to be met, and that all dependence on such a righteousness was vain. Righteousness had to be accomplished in some other way. And so it was.. by faith in Jesus Christ.
But now apart from the law a righteousness of God hath been manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ unto all them that believe; for there is no distinction; [Romans 3:21-22]
so that ye may approve the things that are excellent; that ye may be sincere and void of offence unto the day of Christ; being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are through Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God. [Philippians 1:10-11]
and be found in him, not having a righteousness of mine own, even that which is of the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith: [Philippians 3:9]
I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I that live, but Christ living in me: and that life which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, the faith which is in the of God, who loved me, and gave himself up for me. I do not make void the grace of God: for if righteousness is through the law, then Christ died for nought. [Galatians 2:20-21]
For there is a disannulling of a foregoing commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness (for the law made nothing perfect), and a bringing in thereupon of a better hope, through which we draw nigh unto God. [Hebrews 7:18-19]
Unfortunately the question does arise at this point as to how there can be righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ, which takes us onto a whole other topic.. the doctrine of imputation. Something I had never even heard of until a few weeks ago. When I did however read about it, my reaction was identical to the first time I heard about Calvinism, or predestination. My first thought was .. You have to be kidding! …
I actually read
When God looks at man, he does not see man, but the righteousness of his perfect .
And one even more outrageous…
Since Christ's own righteousness is 'imputed' to the believer, God sees only Christ’s imputed righteousness even while the believer is sinning.
However this is a topic that is best left for another time and another page..
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
they "think" they are the one true church
|
Posted:Feb 3, 2011 3:56 am
Last Updated:Apr 26, 2011 1:48 am 1823 Views
|
Cult Or Christian?
Christian apologists and countercult experts disagree on whether or not Seventh-day Adventism (SDA) should be classified as, theologically, a cult of Christianity.
Some state that while SDA includes a number of doctrines that are outside the mainstraim of historic Christian theology, Seventh-day Adventists do accept the essential doctrines of the Christian faith and should thus be considered Christians. For example, the late Walter Martin, founder of the Christian Research Institute said,
...it is perfectly possible to be a Seventh-day Adventists and be a true follower of Jesus Christ despite heterodox (Differing from orthodox teaching in some significant way) concepts... (Walter Martin, Kingdom of the Cults (Bethany House, Minneapolis, Minnesota), Updated edition 1997, p.517).
This is still the position taken by today's Christian Research Institute:
Though several capable Christian scholars (e.g. Anthony Hoekema, J.K. van Baalen, John Gerstner) have concluded that SDA is a non-Christian cult system, CRI has continued to assert that this is not the case. We take this position based on the content of the doctrine which was stated in an official SDA publication (1957) entitled Questions on Doctrine...
Since SDA does accept the foundational doctrines of historic Christianity (The Trinity, Christ's true deity, His bodily resurrection, etc.) we do not believe that it should be classified as a non-Christian cult...
This does not mean that we endorse the entire theological structure of SDA, since a portion of it is definitely out of the mainstream of historic Christian theology (e.g. Sabbatarianism, conditional immorality or soul sleep, annihiliation of the wicked). Though we would adamantly disagree with Adventists regarding these above mentioned doctrines, it should be added that one could hold these views and remain a believing Christian. In other words, these doctrines do not secure or necessarily inhibit salvation. (Source: Seventh-day Adventism" Christian Research Institute statement on SDA)
Others point out that SDA also also includes teachings that are contrary to the gospel, and are unorthodox in nature.
Historically, evangelicals have had difficulty defining and categorizing SDA. Much SDA doctrine is biblically orthodox. Within its ranks are many true Christians, some even in positions of prominence. At various points in its history, most notably in the 1888 General Conference, the SDA church has been shaken by the biblical gospel. In the 1970s this became quite intense (Se: Paxton, Geoffrey, J., The Shaking of Adventism). Unfortunately, it produced a polarization. The church administrators generally became more entrenched in the unorthodox positions of traditional SDA, while some pastors and even whole congregations left or were asked to leave the SDA church ("From Controversy to Crisis," CRI Journal, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 9–14). In official publications the SDA church continues to defend Ellen White legends, and maintain there was no difference in the degree of inspiration she received from that received by Bible writers
(Review & Herald, 4 October 1928, p. 11; "Source of Final Appeal," Adventist Review, 3 June 1971, pp. 4–6; G. A. Irwin, Mark of the Beast, p. 1; "The Inspiration and Authority of the Ellen G. White Writings," Adventist Review, 15 July 1982, p. 3; Ministry, October 1981, p. 8; see also, Judged by the Gospel, pp. 125–30). In their June, 2000, General Conference they voted to more aggressively affirm and support the "Spirit of Prophecy through the ministry of Ellen White"(Adventist Today, [online: July 2000] ). They also teach a number of other doctrines clearly irreconcilable with the biblical gospel (see "Doctrine," below). So long as these things continue, evangelicals must persist in questioning the status of the SDA church organization in Christianity, and much more, her claim to be God’s only true, end-time "Remnant Church."...
SDA teachings most clearly contrary to the gospel and unorthodox in nature are its insistence on water baptism as an essential prerequisite to salvation, its teaching about the end time significance of sabbath observance to identification of true believers, and its doctrine of the Investigative Judgement.
The SDA's reverence for Ellen G. White is problematic, to say the least:
Ellen White never held official title as the head of the church, but was one of its founders and acknowledged spiritual leader. She rather disingenuously declined to claim the title of "prophet," calling herself a "messenger" instead (Damsteegt, P.G., et. al., Seventh-day Adventists Believe. . ., p. 224). But she claimed to have the "spirit of prophecy," and that her messages were direct from God for the guidance and instruction of the church. With her knowledge and consent others called her a prophet, and even "the Spirit of Prophecy" (Barnett, Maurice, Ellen G. White & Inspiration, pp. 5–17). Having only a third grade education, Ellen White said for years she was unable to read, bolstering the claim that her beautiful prose was inspired by God. However, it has been discovered that she not only read, but plagiarized other Christian authors throughout virtually all her writings. The sad facts of this matter have been thoroughly and indisputably established in several books. (e.g., see; Rea, Walter, The White Lie; and Judged by the Gospel, pp. 361–83). Ellen White died in 1915 at age eighty-eight. [Source: Watchman Fellowship profile of SDA.
Richard Kyle, an evangelical Christian writing from the perspective of a historian in his largely uncritical book ''The Religious Fringe: A History Of Alternative Religions In America,'' writes:
Whether the Seventh-day Adventists are a sect, a cult or a denomination is a matter of intense controversy. Some evangelical scholars have insisted they that are cultic. Others have claimed that they are not. Some scholars have reviewed the institutional developments of the Seventh-day Adventists and asked whether this onetime sect has now become a denomination.
This study will regard Seventh-day Adventism as a sect. To be sure, they possess some cultic characteristics. The Seventh-day Adventists have added a significant number of new and deviant teachings to the Christian tradition. They uplift a prophetic teacher, Ellen G. White, and come close to making her teachings a "third testament." Some of the prophetic positions and their teachings on the ''Investigative Judgment'' have pushed at the boundaries of Christian orthodoxy. In particular, the Investigative Judgment doctrine, which diminishes the work of Christ on the cross by emphasizing his continuing atoning work, stretches the limits of orthodoxy. The Seventh-day Adventists maintain some other beliefs and practices that give them a pronounced sectarian character, not only in the nineteenth century but also in the late twentieth. In particular, their maintenance of the Sabbath and rigid dietary practices separate them from most of Christian society. (Richard Kyle, The Religious Fringe: A History Of Alternative Religions In America. InterVarsity Press, Ill. 1993. p. 150-151.)
The publisher of Apologetics Index considers Seventh-day Adventism to be a cult of Christianity, due to its adherence to un-biblical and extra-biblical doctrines and practices, as well as the movement's failure to repent from its reliance on the works of Ms. Ellen G. White.
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
casting down strongholds and breaking vile curses
|
Posted:Jan 28, 2011 11:04 pm
Last Updated:May 4, 2024 3:53 am 1713 Views
|
I have been looking for years for scriptures that would back up what I was taught. Plead the blood of Jesus. However there is no place where you saw Paul or Peter doing this. So why do we do it? Because well meaning Pastors and friends say to do so? That is why I did it. i did a lot of things people said we should be doing as a believer.
I looked around and read that we wrestle with principalities that we do not see. Well, we do not see God either and he is there, so fair enough. Does the devil make us not choose to receive Christ? No it is our choice. Temptations are a far cry from making one do anything. Wrestling with is not this big influence controlling us. What it gets down to is choice. The choices we make each day. Many are filled with extreme ramifications. Good and bad.
In Christianity, the Holy Spirit resides in every born again believer, to comfort us and to teach us all things. Intimacy with mankind is what Christianity is about. Relationship. No spouse, relative or friend can have the relationship you can have with God if you allow it to be.
I see a lot of people who make everything into this deep deep spiritual thing, when often the situation was just dictated by the flesh. Men and women acting selfishly, thus taking the we out of marriage and replacing it with I. That will always hurt your spouse and always provide a truck load of bricks to start building a wall in the relationship as big as you want to build it. It is that simple.
If you are a believer, there is no curse on you. When you received Jesus as savior all curses were broken and none can come on any born again believer. You will not find one demon cast out of a born again believer or a curse broken over one after Christianity begins, which is with the one time atonement for mankind by Jesus on the cross. The cross changed everything. If you want to know him deeper, try and figure out what that means for you.
If we are honest, you will quickly learn that most of your issues in life are self inflicted.It is not always a spiritual condition. Inflicted by your parents and you. Choices, actions and reactions. We can not make our decisions based on some spiritual principle we are taught. If we want to make the right decisions we will make them by asking the Holy Spirit to guide you. For him to close doors that need to be closed and open the right ones.
In relationships we need to realized there are two people, two sets of everything to consider. Its interesting, it says God loves the humble and he resists the proud.... doesn't turn them away, just resists them. Now how do we as people react to someone we love when they act with pride and arrogance towards us? You bet we resist them. Its human nature to do so.
Reconciliation does not always happen. Sometimes people are just too different. Most of us do not take in all before we marry. By that I mean that we do not consider the good and bad that is in all people. The word states to count the cost. Count the cost. Sometimes the cost of the negative is ignored until the flames of the good come to a simmer from a roaring flame in the focus of the relationship. That is where the cost should have been in the first place. Reality of it all and can I live with this?
Healing? It is simple but it also takes two people in agreement that humble themselves. It doesn't take weeks of fasting or this huge drawn out spiritual warfare speaking into existence and trying to convince yourself of something. No it comes from a commitment of repentance that is continually fueled in the love called humility. Both people. Its simple and hard because it is just as when you come to God. Who is going to rule? Jesus or you. Who is more important? You or the union? Only you know. But instead of Christian programs and feeling if you do this or that. Humble yourself. Do your part.
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
The Old Covenant and the Law of Moses
|
Posted:Jan 24, 2011 6:48 pm
Last Updated:Feb 3, 2011 3:50 am 1918 Views
|
There are three major foundations for understanding the covenants and the Old Testament law. All three give the same conclusion. They are
1. The old covenant is obsolete, and the new covenant has been established.
2. Christians are not obligated to keep "the law of Moses."
3. When Paul discussed "the law," he was often concerned with the entire law of Moses, and he wrote that Christians were not under the authority of that law. Our obligation to obey God is defined by a different law, a spiritual law, which in some cases overlaps Old Testament laws but in other cases supersedes them.
Let's examine each of these points and show that they all support the same conclusion. The New Testament is consistent. First, the matter of covenants. They are discussed in detail in the book of Hebrews, especially chapter 8. There, the High Priesthood of Jesus Christ is contrasted with the Levitical high priesthood. The ministry Jesus received is far superior to the Levitical ministry, and his covenant is far superior to the old covenant (verse 6).
But there was a problem with the first covenant — the people were not faithful and were not able to obey (verses 7-9). God therefore promised a new covenant, and "by calling this covenant `new,' he has made the first one obsolete" (verse 13). The old covenant is obsolete — ended. The agreement and its terms of relationship no longer have authority.
The writer of Hebrews says that the old covenant "will soon disappear," and indeed most of its operations ceased in A.D. 70 when Roman armies destroyed the Temple. Even though elements of the old covenant system continue to be observed in Judaism, the New Testament declares that the old covenant itself is obsolete.
Now, we must ask, just what was the old covenant? What laws are we talking about here? First, the core of the old covenant is the Ten Commandments (Exodus 34:28; Deuteronomy 4:13). As part of the old covenant, the people at Mt. Sinai also agreed to obey all the laws in Exodus 20, 21, 22 and 23. These additional laws became part of the covenant God made with Israel, and the covenant was then ratified with blood (Exodus 24:6-.
This is the covenant that has been declared obsolete. It has no legal authority. Further, we cannot assume that any part of the contract is valid when the entire contract has been declared obsolete. We cannot assume that any particular group of laws must remain together.
The old covenant included much more than Exodus 20-23. Hebrews 9:1 tells us that it also included directions for the tabernacle. Instructions for the altar, Levitical priests and animal sacrifices were given in Exodus 25-31. These were part of God's original plan for Israel. He knew very well that the people would sin and would need a tabernacle and regular burnt offerings. It was all part of the plan, part of his relationship with his people, part of his covenant.
Added because of transgressions?
Some have said that the sacrificial laws were added "because of transgressions," as if sacrifices were not part of the original law. But this is not true. Moses told Pharaoh that the Israelites wanted to leave Egypt so they could offer sacrifices and burnt offerings in the wilderness (Exodus 10:25). Before the Israelites left Egypt, they sacrificed Passover lambs. Even within the old covenant, altars and burnt offerings were commanded (Exodus 20:24) — all this before the covenant was ratified and before it had a chance to be transgressed.
When Galatians 3:19 says that the law was added because of transgressions, it is talking about the entire law — everything that was added 430 years after Abraham (verse 17). This law had a mediator (verse 19) — this law was the covenant. The entire covenant was added, becoming part of God's relationship with his people, because of transgressions. The law is made for lawbreakers (1 Timothy 1:9). God gave rules for civil and religious behavior because the people, even before they got to Sinai, were disobedient — just as God knew that they would be. Sacrifices were not an afterthought — they were part of the original covenant.
The idea that sacrifices were not a part of the law as first given at Sinai was based on a misunderstanding of Jeremiah 7:22, which says that God did not at first speak to the Israelites about burnt offerings and sacrifices. If read literally, this flatly contradicts Exodus 10:25 and Exodus 20:24. Jeremiah 7:22 is actually a Hebrew figure of speech indicating relative emphasis. When God brought the people out of Egypt, it was not because he wanted sacrifices and offerings. Rather, he wanted obedience, and the sacrifices were only a tool to help the people remember that they ought to obey. Obedience was the primary concern, even though the covenant also prescribed sacrifices for the inevitable transgressions.
(A similar figure of speech can be seen in John 12:47, where Jesus says he did not come to judge the world, but to save it. John 9:39, however, says plainly that Jesus did come to judge the world. The "contradiction" is explained by understanding that John 12:47 gives a contrast in emphasis, not in fact. Although Jesus came to judge, his primary purpose was to save.)
The point of this digression is that the old covenant included not only Exodus 20-23, but other laws as well. When the Sinaitic covenant was renewed with the next generation of Israelites, all the laws of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers were included as part of the covenant. But these laws were still considered the same covenant (Deuteronomy 1:1-5; 5:2-3). The book of Deuteronomy contains many additional laws, all considered part of the same covenant, the same basic agreement or relationship between Israel and God.
The old is obsolete
When the book of Hebrews says that the old covenant is obsolete, it is referring to the whole package of Old Testament law. Some individual laws, of course, are still valid, but the package as a whole is not an authoritative package.
We see this again in 2 Corinthians 3. In verse 3, Paul makes a contrast between the "tablets of stone" — a clear reference to the Ten Commandments — and the writing of God's Spirit on the hearts of Christians. In verse 6, he contrasts the new covenant with "the letter," which in context means the letter of the old covenant. Verse 7 talks about the law engraved on stones and the shining of Moses' face. It is clear that Paul is talking about the Ten Commandments, for those are the engraved stones Moses had when his face shone in glory and he had to put a veil over his face.
The old covenant was glorious, but it was "fading away," replaced by a covenant much more glorious. Paul was already administering the new covenant. The old was already obsolete, and was fading away. Although the sacrifices continued to be administered in Jerusalem, they would cease soon after Paul wrote. The old covenant has ended, and we should live by the terms of the new covenant.
Some people object, saying that God's covenants are compared to marriage agreements, and we are only betrothed to Christ and the marriage has not yet taken place. Some have reasoned from this analogy that the new covenant has not yet been made. However, marriage is only an analogy, and we must not take it so far that it leads us astray from the facts!
Do we have an agreement with God? Has he promised to give us certain things if we believe in and obey his ? Yes, he has. We have an agreement, and an agreement with God is a covenant. We have a covenant with God, and it is the new covenant. Hebrews 8:6 tells us that Christ's covenant "is founded on better promises." It "was established," says the King James Version; the New American Standard says it "has been enacted." The verb is in the past tense, indicating that the new covenant has been made. An analogy cannot contradict the clear meaning of this verse. Blood has been shed, ratifying the new covenant (Luke 22:20; Hebrews 10:29).
We have not received all the promised blessings of the new covenant, of course, just as the Israelites didn't receive their physical promises until many years after their covenant had been made. The fact that the promises are still future does not mean that the covenant hasn't been made. In fact, the very existence of the promises shows that the agreement has been made. We do have a relationship with God. Paul was a minister of the Spirit, not of the letter. He was a minister of the new covenant, not of the old. One aspect of the new covenant is that we are forgiven (Hebrews 10:17-1.
To summarize this section:
1. The old covenant was built around the core of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 34:2.
2. The old covenant is obsolete (Hebrews 8:13).
3. The new covenant has been established (Hebrews 8:6).
The law of Moses
Next, let's examine the way the New Testament uses the phrase "law of Moses." This term will also help us understand the difference between the Old Testament era and the New. The Jerusalem council (Acts 15) met to discuss this very question. "Some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, `The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses' " (verse 5).
The council concluded that gentiles did not have to obey the law of Moses. The New American Bible, for example, says this: "The Jerusalem `Council' marks the official rejection of the rigid view that Gentile converts were obligated to observe the Mosaic law.... Paul's refusal to impose the Mosaic law on the Gentile Christians is supported by Peter on the ground that within his own experience God bestowed the Holy Spirit upon Cornelius and his household without preconditions concerning the adoption of the Mosaic law."
In verse 28, the apostles told the gentiles that they did not require anything beyond four particular restrictions. This did not mean, of course, that they were free to murder and blaspheme. What it means is that they were to avoid murder and blasphemy because of Christ, not because of the law of Moses.
Just what is the "law of Moses"? Just what is being discussed? The New Testament itself tells us what the law of Moses includes. This phrase is used six other times in the New Testament.
1. Luke 2:22: "When the time of their purification according to the Law of Moses had been completed, Joseph and Mary took [Jesus] to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord." So the law of Moses includes rituals regarding uncleanness after childbirth. It should be obvious already that it doesn't make sense to claim that Christians ought to observe the law of Moses. Neither Jewish nor gentile Christians have to observe these purification rituals.
2. Luke 24:44: Jesus, after his resurrection, said to his disciples: "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms." In this verse, the law of Moses includes prophecies about the Messiah. It's not just ritualistic laws — it's the books of Moses, the Torah of Moses, the Pentateuch.
3. John 7:22-23: Jesus was talking to the Pharisees: "Yet, because Moses gave you circumcision (though actually it did not come from Moses, but from the patriarchs), you circumcise a on the Sabbath. Now if a can be circumcised on the Sabbath so that the law of Moses may not be broken, why are you angry with me for healing the whole man on the Sabbath?" Here, the law of Moses includes the law of circumcision. Moses himself didn't originate the practice, but he wrote about it. It is in his law.
4. Acts 28:23, where Paul is in Rome: "They arranged to meet Paul on a certain day, and came in even larger numbers to the place where he was staying. From morning till evening he explained and declared to them the kingdom of God and tried to convince them about Jesus from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets." Here again, the law of Moses includes prophecies about Jesus Christ. It is one section of the Old Testament.
5. 1 Corinthians 9:9 — "It is written in the Law of Moses: `Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.' " Here, the law of Moses includes civil laws. Paul could adapt the principle for the new covenant, but in the law of Moses it was a civil law.
6. Hebrews 10:28: "Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses." This is also talking about a civil law, the administration of the death penalty in ancient Israel.
The law of Moses included civil laws, religious ceremonies and prophecies. It referred to everything that Moses wrote, the books of Moses, the Torah or the Law. The law of Moses includes everything in those books, and that's what the Jerusalem council was about. Some people claimed that the gentile Christians had to be circumcised and to keep all the laws of Moses. The council concluded that they did not have to keep all those laws. Instead, they gave only four prohibitions.
This is brought out again in chapter 21. Paul had returned to Jerusalem, and rumors swirled that he had been teaching Jews to abandon the law of Moses (verse 21). The rumors were false. Paul had not been teaching any such thing. Although the rituals were not required for Christians, neither were they forbidden. Jewish Christians were free to participate in their traditional customs. To make this point clear, the Jerusalem elders suggested that Paul participate in such a ritual himself (verses 23-24).
In chapter 21, the controversy centered on whether Paul taught Jews to abandon the law. There was no question about the gentiles, since they had already been given the four prohibitions (verse 25). Everyone accepted the fact that they did not have to keep the law of Moses. This is made even more clear in the Greek text used by the King James and New King James translators. The elders wanted Paul to demonstrate "that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law. But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing," except for the four prohibitions they had already been given (verse 25, NKJ). Gentiles do not have to abide by the customs of Moses. They do not need to live like Jews in order to be Christians.
So, to summarize this section, we see that
1. The law of Moses contains all the laws that Moses wrote.
2. Some Pharisees thought that gentile Christians ought to keep the law of Moses.
3. The Jerusalem Council declared that they did not have to. The writings of Moses do not have legal authority over Christians. They are instructive, but obsolete in their legal authority.
Not under the law
Next, let us examine some of Paul's statements about the law. Portions of his epistles are difficult to understand. One reason is that he uses the word law with different meanings. That should caution us, but it should not prevent us from trying to see what he meant. We do not want to distort his writings to our own destruction by assigning meanings to his words that he didn't intend. We have to study the epistles to see what he meant.
Consider the phrase "under the law," for example. Does it mean under the penalty of the law, as some claim, or does it mean under the authority of the law? Let's see how it is used:
Romans 2:12: "All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law." The contrast here is between Jew and gentile. Jews are under the authority of the law, and gentiles are not.
Romans 3:19: "Whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God." The law speaks to those who are under its authority.
1 Corinthians 9:20-21: "To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law."
Jews were under the law, so Paul, in an effort to win them, acted in accordance with the law, as we see in Acts 21. However, Paul did not considerhimself under the law that Jews were under. He is talking about behavior, not his salvation status. He was free to act like a gentile if he wanted to, and that's what he did when trying to win gentiles to the faith. He acted like a person who did not have the law. However, he makes it clear that he was under the law of Christ, God's real law, the spiritual and eternal law. But Paul was not under the authority of the law that separated Jews from gentiles.
Galatians 4:4-5: "When the time had fully come, God sent his , born of a woman, born under law, to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons." Jesus Christ was born under the law — under its authority. He never broke the law, and did not deserve its penalty. By being born under the Jewish law, he was able to redeem Jews as well as those who do not have the law.
Galatians 4:21: "Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says?" Paul is writing to Christians who were tempted to accept old covenant laws as requirements. They wanted to be under the authority of the old covenant – not its penalty. Which law is Paul talking about? The same "law" that says that Abraham had two sons (verse 22). It is the law that contains Genesis — the law of Moses, the books of Moses. Some of the Galatians wanted to be under that law, and Paul was arguing against it.
In the above passages, "under the law" means under the authority of the old covenant law. That is also its meaning in the only other occurrence in the New Testament: "Sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace. What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!" (Romans 6:14-15). We are not under the authority of the law, but under the authority of grace — but grace does not mean that we are free to do our own thing. Rather, grace comes with obligation — we are under the law of Christ. We must obey him.
Dead to the law
We see another revealing discussion of law in Romans 7:1-4. Paul speaks to the Jews: "Do you not know, brothers — for I am speaking to men who know the law — that the law has authority over a man only as long as he lives? For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage.... So, my brothers, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God."
Paul says that we have died to the law — even the Jews have died to the law through identification with Jesus Christ. Therefore, the law no longer has authority over us, since we belong to Christ, not to the law. Christ is the one we obey, so that we can bear spiritual fruit. The law is contrasted with Christ, and it is the old covenant law that Paul is talking about — the Torah, the Law portion of the Scriptures. We can be under the law, or under Christ. Being under both is not an option.
Galatians 3 is also clear about the law. Verses 2 and 5 contrast faith with law. Paul is not talking about the eternal, spiritual law in this passage, nor is he talking about the sacrificial laws, which could not be kept in Galatia. He is talking about the Torah, "the Book of the Law" (verse 10). It is the law added 430 years after Abraham (verse 17), which includes all of Exodus and Leviticus.
Abraham's covenant was based on faith (verses 6-7), and we are heirs of his promise (verse 29). The law was added to that covenant because of the transgressions of the Israelites (verse 19), but the law cannot alter the Abrahamic promises that we inherit. Rather, the law — the books of Moses — was a temporary measure until Christ, the Seed, came (verse 19). "Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law" (verse 25).
Here we see the same conclusion. The Scriptures are consistent. Christians are not required to obey the laws of Moses. They were glorious for a time, but their purpose has been superseded by Jesus Christ.
Paul was not against all law, of course. He talks often of the obligations that Christians have. Even in the book of Galatians, he concludes with exhortations about sins to avoid and righteousness to seek. These things are challenging — humanly impossible, in fact. We need to be led by God's Spirit and transformed in inner character into the pattern of Jesus Christ. He is the standard; the old covenant law is not.
We see more in the next chapter, with Paul's allegory of the covenants, Abraham, Hagar and Sarah. Hagar stands for the old covenant (verse 24), and Paul tells us to get rid of her (verse 30). Those who are under her covenant are slaves, whereas those under the authority of the new covenant have the full rights of (verse 4).
In Galatians 5, Paul makes it clear again. Although the old covenant law enslaves those who are under it, we have been set free from that law (verse 1). But if we submit to the old covenant law of circumcision, then Christ is of no value to us (verse 2). We are either under the new covenant or the old; we cannot be under both at the same time. The basis of our relationship with God should be faith in Christ, not the law of Moses. But if we want to be under the old covenant, then we are "obligated to obey the whole law" (verse 3). Christians, however, are not obligated to obey the whole law. Paul is not talking about just sacrificial or ceremonial laws — he is talking about the entire law. The entire law of Moses is obsolete, and Christians are not under its authority.
Christians obey some of the laws of Moses, of course. We should not covet or lie to one another. But we obey these laws not because Moses wrote about them, but because they are part of the Christlike life. We are under Christ, not Moses. Christ tells us to love our neighbors, and the New Testament explains that this means we do not lie or covet.
Live like a gentile
As one more illustration of Paul's use of the word law, let's look at Ephesians 2:11-19. Paul is saying that gentiles were once separated from the covenants, separated from Christ. But in Christ they have now been brought near. How is this possible? Because Christ has destroyed the barrier that kept the gentiles away. He has abolished the law. Which law? The law that had commandments and regulations separating Jews from gentiles.
Because Jesus has destroyed the legal basis for discriminating against gentiles, gentiles have become part of God's people. Does this mean that gentiles have to become like Jews, obey laws pertaining to Jews and live like Jews? Certainly not. That was precisely the conclusion of the Jerusalem council, and it is the conclusion of Paul, too, since he says that even Jews have died to the old covenant law and are not bound by it. Paul had the freedom to live like a Jew, or the freedom to live like someone who lived uprightly though that person did not have the law.
Peter also understood that he was permitted to live like a gentile (Galatians 2:14). Which laws would a righteous gentile be expected to keep? Which laws of Moses separated "living like a gentile" from "living like a Jew"? Apparently rabbis did not require righteous gentiles to be circumcised, to observe Jewish dietary restrictions or to observe the Sabbath. Those three laws, from both Jewish and gentile perspectives, distinguished Jews from gentiles. James Dunn writes this:
*
In the phrase...works of the law...Paul has in mind particularly circumcision, food laws and sabbath, as the characteristic marks of the faithful Jew, so recognized and affirmed by both Jew and Gentile.... Just these observances were widely regarded as characteristically and distinctively Jewish. Writers like Petronius, Plutarch, Tacitus and Juvenal took it for granted that, in particular, circumcision, abstention from pork, and the sabbath, were observances which marked out the practitioners as Jews, or as people who were very attracted to Jewish ways.... They were the peculiar rites which marked out the Jews as that peculiar people (Jesus, Paul and the Law,pages 4, 191-192).
To summarize this section: 1) To be under the law is to be under its authority. 2) Christians are not under the law. 3) We are not obligated to keep the Torah. Rather, we may live like righteous gentiles who do not have the law of Moses.
A New Testament authority is needed before any old practices are imposed or required. That's because the law of Moses, the old covenant, the Torah, is obsolete. We are not under that law; we are not obligated to keep laws that were given to the Israelites only.
Grace Communion International
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
