davidbu@tekigm2.men.tek.com (David Buxton) (11/15/89)
The Prophecy:
"The Lord . . . . will magnify the law, and make it honorable." (Isa.
42:21)
Prophecy fulfilled:
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I
have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the
truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not
the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law
until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least
of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called
least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches
these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I
tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Phari-
sees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the
kingdom of heaven." (Matt. 5:17-20)
Jesus did indeed sweep away the man made laws and codifications such as the
Mishna and magnified and made honorable the Law of God which has always
been God's law of Love in both the OT and the NT.ejalbert@phoenix.princeton.edu (Edmund Jason Albert) (11/17/89)
In article <Nov.15.03.57.58.1989.12620@athos.rutgers.edu> davidbu@tekigm2.men.tek.com (David Buxton) writes: >"The Lord . . . . will magnify the law, and make it honorable." (Isa. 42:21) >Prophecy fulfilled: > "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I > have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.... (Matt. 5:17-20) >Jesus did indeed sweep away the man made laws and codifications such as the >Mishna and magnified and made honorable the Law of God which has always >been God's law of Love in both the OT and the NT. If one believes Matt. 5:17-20, then how can Paul say that he is free from the Law, that circumcision is no longer necessary, that dietary rules need not be followed, etc? Jason Albert Princeton University [There are a couple of possible answers. One is that Jesus didn't abolish the Law, but the Law was part of a covenant with the Jews, and applied only to them. That is almost certainly the interpretation used by much of the Church. Possibly it was also Paul's. He certainly contrasts the covenant with Moses -- which involves the Law -- with the covenant with Abraham -- which is based on faith. Note also the comment in Mat 5:18 that nothing will pass from the law "until all is accomplished". There is some evidence for a Jewish exegetical tradition saying that in the end times, the Law will no longer be valid. Paul may have thought that in Christ's death "all in accomplished", and the Law no longer applies. --clh]
firth@sei.cmu.edu (11/20/89)
[The Christian and the Law] Please permit me to offer a personal perspective on the relationship between a Christian and the Law as we find it in the Old Testament. Previous discussion has wondered whether Jesus repealed, fulfilled, or somehow changed the Law, and others have asked why Christians don't feel bound by all the detailed regulations in Leviticus and elsewhere. Let me offer an analogy. If you look at the statute laws of some States in this Union, as they were in, say, 1850, you will find a lot of legislation about slaves. About importing them, buying and selling them, proper and improper treatment, disputes over ownership, status of fugitives, and much more. Now, on 1865 December 18, something very strange happened to these laws. They were not repealed or amended individually; the 'letter of the law' remained on the statute book. But they all suddenly ceased to be operative. The reason was not a change in the law; it was a change in US, in the human condition. At that moment, the Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery, and hence made obsolete all laws relating thereto. Similarly, on Good Friday 781AUC, something very strange happened to the old Law, and for the same reason. By His Atonement, Christ changed for ever the human condition, so that the Law and the Covenant no longer applied. Before His sacrifice, we were separated from God, related to him by commandments, and laws, and contracts. Thereafter, we are reconciled to God, and our relation with him is forever different. In the terms of the Prophecy of Elias, the Age of the Law ended, and the Age of Grace began. But the change is not in the Law, but in us: we that were slaves to sin are now free men in Christ.
davidbu@tekigm2.men.tek.com (David Buxton) (11/20/89)
[In response to a question about how Paul could have justified his idea that the Law was ended, I suggested a couple of answers. One is that Jesus didn't abolish the Law, but the Law was part of a covenant with the Jews, and applied only to them. --clh] How can this be when we see so many places where Paul, as a Christian after Jesus has returned to His Father, speaking with such high regard for the 'law'. Paul spoke as a Christian to an audiance of Christians plus those that he wished to convert to Christianity. > He certainly contrasts the covenant with Moses -- which involves the Law > -- with the covenant with Abraham -- which is based on faith. Note > also the comment in Mat 5:18 that nothing will pass from the law > "until all is accomplished". My Bible clearly says - not until heaven and earth pass away. Sounds to me like the 2nd Coming of Jesus. And there are texts that for example say clearly that the Sabbath will be kept in heaven. > There is some evidence for a Jewish > exegetical tradition saying that in the end times, the Law will no > longer be valid. Paul may have thought that in Christ's death "all is > accomplished", and the Law no longer applies. --clh] Which nuiance of the 'law' will not be valid? Certainly not God's law written by His own hand. And again - Paul in enough places speaks so highly of the 'law'. Dave (David E. Buxton) davidbu@tekigm2.MEN.TEK.COM
davidbu@tekigm2.men.tek.com (David Buxton) (11/24/89)
In article <Nov.19.14.31.14.1989.13660@athos.rutgers.edu>, firth@sei.cmu.edu writes: > [The Christian and the Law] > {The Analogy of slave laws and these slave laws becoming obsolete when slavery was abolished.} I saw this as a very good analogy but wish to modify the application. Those laws, ordinances and ceremonies that were 'shadows' of the cross to come became obsolete at the cross. This is why we no longer sacrifice lambs. Another set of laws became obsolete for a different reason. Moses wrote the laws - cited as laws that are against us - with which to administer the camp of Israel. These were local ordinances. Israel was also in the context of a theocracy. God was their God and their King. Under a theocracy rule they were ruled by the word of prophets of God under the direction of God. Later they came to insist upon having kings. Later they rejected and killed the Son of God. The theocracy relationship was utterly broken. These Mosaic laws of administration became obsolete as the theocracy relationship dissolved. Certainly - if you were to break a Mosaic law that called for the death penalty - your church would not convene to administer this penalty. These laws of death, these laws that were against us, were done away with. They became obsolete. The laws of each particular country convene to condemn you if you break them. You are obligated to these laws of the land as long as they do not rule against the law of God. You should obey God rather than man. How can you judge when man's law comes in conflict with God's law unless you know what is God's law. At the core center stands the decalogue written by the hand of God and clearly not made obsolete. Outside of this core center it is not quite so clear what laws are obsolete, what are worth learning from, and what can directly be applied today. At the core center - the decalogue - there should be no argument - this is eternal law written by the hand of God. Outside of that core center there may well be some uncertainty from person to person as to which particular law still stands. I believe a study of the whole is worth each persons time so as to personally, guided by the Holy Spirit, each can make his own choices. Reading the NT I believe it is clear that when Jesus said the law would not change He was clearly including all of the Decalogue. Do as Paul advised - he sited the Bereans as an example - study the scriptures to see if these things are true. Study the writings of Paul in the context of the whole Bible. > But the change is not in the Law, but in us: we that were > slaves to sin are now free men in Christ. I agree with this statement as long as you date the cross correctly. If I come to the cross today then today is the day on which I am freed of having to keep the law. Now I can ask my Lord Jesus Christ to keep the law in me. I am not saved by the works that I do. I am saved by the works that Jesus performs in me. I am not saved by a keeping of the law. I am saved by the law that Jesus keeps in me. The NT makes it abundantly clear that I am held accountable to the law. I cannot keep it and so I am doomed. Christ can keep it in me and that is the vital difference between legalism and a Christ filled, spirit filled, love filled - keeping of the law. This is the only type of law keeping that can save. Dave (David E. Buxton) davidbu@tekigm2.MEN.TEK.COM
levy@ttbcad.att.com (Daniel R Levy) (11/24/89)
In article <Nov.19.14.31.14.1989.13660@athos.rutgers.edu>, firth@sei.cmu.edu writes: > [The Christian and the Law] > > Please permit me to offer a personal perspective on the > relationship between a Christian and the Law as we find > it in the Old Testament. Previous discussion has wondered > whether Jesus repealed, fulfilled, or somehow changed the > Law, and others have asked why Christians don't feel bound > by all the detailed regulations in Leviticus and elsewhere. (see below) > Let me offer an analogy. [U.S. abolition of slavery::antebellum slave statutes == \ Jesus' atonement through crucifixion/death::Old Testament laws] > In the terms of the Prophecy of Elias, the Age of > the Law ended, and the Age of Grace began. Could you please give a biblical reference? Despite some digging, I can't find this prophecy in my bible. I have no reason to disbelieve what you said; I just want to read and understand the verses and their context for myself. There's a simpler explanation for why [modern] Christians aren't bound by the Levitical regulations. Almost all modern Christians aren't Jewish (according to the traditional Jewish definition of matrilineal descent). As related in chapter 15 of Acts, the early church declared that gentiles need only follow a severely abridged version of the Jewish Law in order to be accepted into the church. Acts 15:10-11 (Peter speaking): "Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are." Acts 15:28-29 (a letter from the church elders and apostles to the gentile Christians in Antioch, Syria, and Cicilia): "For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials: that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication: if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will do well. Farewell." Since Peter had Jesus' authorization to declare what is bound and loosed in heaven (Matthew 17:19), and he assented to this abridgment, that seems to be the last word on the matter. > But the change is not in the Law, but in us: we that were > slaves to sin are now free men in Christ. -- Daniel R. Levy UNIX(R) mail: att!ttbcad!levy, att!cbnewsc!levy AT&T Bell Laboratories 5555 West Touhy Avenue Any opinions expressed in the message above are Skokie, Illinois 60077 mine, and not necessarily AT&T's.