Grace and Law

[Rella]

Another of my inbox things this AM is this article which has been talked about here just recently.

I am posting this here as it seems to be from other thoughts we do not walk often about on GC. That being a Jewish one.

AND before those of you poo poo the idea.... Dont you dare every fail to remember Jesus was Jewish as he walked the earth.

https://weekly.israelbiblecenter.com/grace-and-law/?via=78f4ca4

"For from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known." (Gospel of John 1:16-18)

As the Protestant Christian movement emerged, one of the biggest disagreements between those who would one day become Protestants and those who would remain Roman Catholic was the issue of the law's function in the life of the believer. One of the five most important theological "shortcut" phrases of the Reformation was, "sola fide" which means, "by faith alone". This phrase indicated how one was "saved" from God's eternal judgment. This 15th-16th-century conflict between Protestants and Catholics was later read back into the Pauline writings and projected back into Paul's own words. Today, hardly anyone will object to that fact that Paul must be read through a first-century Israelite interpretive lens and not through the later lenses of a Catholic-vs-Protestant conflict historically unrelated to Paul.

While the juxtaposition of the law and the gospel was present in the Church Fathers, it is not until the time of the Reformation that the juxtaposing of law and grace became so pronounced.[1] This became a dominant emphasis of the Reformation. The opposite of grace became law; the opposite of law became grace. However, scripturally the opposite of law was never grace but lawlessness. Just as the opposite of grace was never law but disgrace.



Like Paul, John has also been greatly misunderstood and interpreted anachronistically. In John 1:17, for example, some important English Bible translations (such as KJV and NET Bible) insert the additional word – "but". This word is not present in the original Greek. Moreover, even when modern translations do not add the word "but" (see the ESV quoted above) the verse is normally understood as if the "but" is implied. It is almost impossible for us to read this text and not juxtapose law and grace in our contemporary minds (Try it! You too will have a hard time.)

If one ignores the negative reading and instead interprets the phrase (in verse 17) positively – "The Law came through Moses; (and) grace and truth come through Jesus Christ" – then the text flows organically. In this case, it is obviously connected with the previous confession by the Gospel's author that grace was given in addition to the grace already provided. (16"For from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace.") Perhaps a translation that can help us get rid of this inbred dichotomy would read like this:

"For the Torah was given through Moses and grace and truth came through Jesus Christ".

God's desire is that we come to know Him intimately. We come to know Him through the study of His Word. If you desire a deeper understanding of God's Word, it is essential that you understand the Jewish background and culture.

[RB]

Rella, what are you looking for in posting this article? He did not say enough to show exactly where he is coming from, though he did make a couple of statements showing his bias toward Judaism~which is a dead religion as far as God's word teaches.

We live under the religion of Jesus Christ, full of GRACE and truth, whereas, Judaism was a religion that could not provide perfection Hebrews 7:11-19; it had carnal commandments, except for the Ten Commandments, which was given to be school master for the very elect, teaching them to look and trust totally in the coming promised Messiah. 

Judaism was a far inferior religion in comparison to that which was to be revealed in Jesus Christ gospel. Read carefully Hebrews 7-10 God found fault with those under the Jews' religion~under the religion of Jesus Christ, God sees NO SINS in his people, because they are under the BLOOD of the Son of God, not ever to be remembered again, no, not ever.

Under the Jews' religion, the blood of bulls, goats sheep, etc., could never put away sins, but every year the remembrance of them demanded another sacrifice. Their conscience never enjoy that their sins were forever gone, UNLESS one could look past that wordly religion which had earthy worship written all over it.

Those who trust in Christ alone worship God IN SPIRIT and in truth without an earthly priest coming in between them and God! Our priest, sits at the right hand of God, makes intercession for us, even concerning things that never enters into our hearts.

So much could be said, but enough to say, I do not believe If one desires a deeper understanding of God's Word, it is essential that you understand the Jewish background and culture.

If we truly desire to know the truth, then we should learn the book of HEBREWS~written by a believer in Jesus Christ~if we master that book we will have a good understanding of the truth as it is IN Jesus Christ, not in the Jews' religion.

[4WD]

If you desire a deeper understanding of God's Word, it is essential that you understand the Jewish background and culture.

I certainly believe that we need to understand the OT.  After all, it is also God's word.  And understanding the Jewish background and culture is part and parcel to understanding the OT.  However, we need to keep it in proper perspective. 

If we truly desire to know the truth, then we should learn the book of HEBREWS~written by a believer in Jesus Christ~if we master that book we will have a good understanding of the truth as it is IN Jesus Christ, not in the Jews' religion.

I am not sure what you intend with "the Jews' religion".  The Old Covenant was not "the Jews' religion"; it was "God's religion".  It was put in place by God for the specific purpose of preparing the way for the New Covenant and Jesus' incarnation, life on earth, and His sacrifice on the cross.

We need to always keep in mind that under the Old Covenant there was forgiveness of sin.  However, forgiveness is not redemption; redemption requires both forgiveness and punishment. Under the Old Covenant, the punishment for sin was eternal condemnation. Under the New Covenant that punishment can come either in the form of eternal condemnation of the sinner or as a ransom paid by Jesus in His death on the cross.  Acceptance of one or the other is the prerogative of the sinner; he can believe in God and abide by the payment of the ransom, or he can disbelieve in God and accept the punishment of eternal condemnation himself.  Hebrews 9:11-28 details that difference.

It is really that simple.  The tough part, tougher for some than for others, is coming to believe in God. 

[RB]

I am not sure what you intend with "the Jews' religion".

Galatians 1:14~And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

Or "in Judaism"; and the more he did so, or was versed in, and wedded to their principles, the more violent a persecutor he was. He was under a very considerable master, Gamaliel, a Rabbi of great note among the Jews; and he himself a youth of uncommon natural abilities, so that his proficiency in Jewish learning was very great~John Gill and all others understood what the Jews' religion consist of~I'm sure if you stop and think would say the same.

[4WD]

Okay, I now understand what you meant.  I probably should have searched in the KJV where that phrase can be found.

[Alan]

There is a distinct difference between the Christian and Jewish perspectives of the Old Testament, it isn't really something we share in context. 

[4WD]

There is a considerable number of Christians who express ideas of eventual supremacy of the Jewish nation in very much the same way as the Jewish perspectives in the time of Jesus.  The Jews, I believe, rejected Jesus mostly because he was not promoting the return of Israelite dominance in this world.  They wanted and expected the return of "King David". There is a significant portion of Christendom today that want and expect that as well.

[NyawehNyoh]

.
• Rom 2:7 . .To those who by perseverance in doing good seek glory, honor, and immortality, He will give eternal life.

Webster's defines "perseverance" as: continued effort to do or achieve something despite difficulties, failure, or opposition, viz: steadfastness.

In other words: in order to attain to eternal life in doing good, one's good must be consistent, i.e. it can't be 100% today and then 95% tomorrow-- no, it has to be 100% every day because that 5% deficit will kill their chances of success.

* As a general rule Catholics are not allowed to believe themselves capable of perseverance.

"If anyone says that he will for certain, with an absolute and infallible certainty, have that great gift of perseverance even to the end, unless he shall have learned this by a special revelation, let him be anathema." (Council of Trent Session 6, Chapter 16, Canon 16)
_

[4WD]

I wonder if you really know what all of that means.

[Alan]

In other words: in order to attain to eternal life in doing good, one's good must be consistent, i.e. it can't be 100% today and then 95% tomorrow-- no, it has to be 100% every day because that 5% deficit will kill their chances of success.

Disagree, in your model of salvation, grace is non-existent.

[NyawehNyoh]

.
Masochism can be roughly defined as deriving gratification from being subjected to physical pain or humiliation by one's own self and/or by another person. i.e. pleasure in being abused or dominated, viz; a taste for suffering.

It's been my experience that there are numbers of Christians at large whose spiritual ideology is an amalgam of grace and punishment. In other words; in their mind's eye, Christ's crucifixion and resurrection makes it possible now for folks to attain to Heaven, but not handed to them in a gift-wrapped box, i.e. not gratis: free of charge with no strings attached. Instead; they prefer to earn it, viz: it isn't in their nature to be satisfied with kindness while at the core of their being craving the lash. 

Sweet dreams are made of this,
Who am I to disagree?
I've traveled the world and the seven seas,
Everybody's lookin' for something.

Some of them want to use you,
Some of them want to get used by you.
Some of them want to abuse you,
Some of them want to be abused.
(Eurythmics: Annie Lennox & David A. Stewart, 1983)
_

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

I wonder if you really know what all of that means.

I swear I could begin literally every post I make here with that sentence.

[4WD]

Isn't that the truth? 

[Rella]

Rella, what are you looking for in posting this article? He did not say enough to show exactly where he is coming from, though he did make a couple of statements showing his bias toward Judaism~which is a dead religion as far as God's word teaches.

We live under the religion of Jesus Christ, full of GRACE and truth, whereas, Judaism was a religion that could not provide perfection Hebrews 7:11-19; it had carnal commandments, except for the Ten Commandments, which was given to be school master for the very elect, teaching them to look and trust totally in the coming promised Messiah. 

Judaism was a far inferior religion in comparison to that which was to be revealed in Jesus Christ gospel. Read carefully Hebrews 7-10 God found fault with those under the Jews' religion~under the religion of Jesus Christ, God sees NO SINS in his people, because they are under the BLOOD of the Son of God, not ever to be remembered again, no, not ever.

Under the Jews' religion, the blood of bulls, goats sheep, etc., could never put away sins, but every year the remembrance of them demanded another sacrifice. Their conscience never enjoy that their sins were forever gone, UNLESS one could look past that wordly religion which had earthy worship written all over it.

Those who trust in Christ alone worship God IN SPIRIT and in truth without an earthly priest coming in between them and God! Our priest, sits at the right hand of God, makes intercession for us, even concerning things that never enters into our hearts.

So much could be said, but enough to say, I do not believe If one desires a deeper understanding of God's Word, it is essential that you understand the Jewish background and culture.

If we truly desire to know the truth, then we should learn the book of HEBREWS~written by a believer in Jesus Christ~if we master that book we will have a good understanding of the truth as it is IN Jesus Christ, not in the Jews' religion.

Well Red,

I posted this because this was looking at me. And as there has been recent discussions that mentioned Grace and Law.

Then one morning one of my emails ( I average 150 to 175 a day) came one saying things somewhat differently or at odds with you and 4WD, Alan, and even  NyawehNyoh

I guess you find fault not so much with what is suggested here but because it came from the Israel Bible Center.com and the inferiority you find in them.  Surprise! They are not all wrong.

This supplies another cog, as it were, being added to the wheel we keep chasing for understanding.

OH... I KNOW... I know you have clarity in all. All four of you do. Clarity so cloudy that not one of you will agree with his brother.

Trouble is... your clarity escapes others so we continue to read and study to show ourselves approved with the same approval you think you have obtained. 2 Tim 2:15.

And from time to time we wish to share things that are not anti the beliefs all true Christians hold but just seems clearer in part.

As when someone states

""For the Torah was given through Moses and grace and truth came through Jesus Christ".

God's desire is that we come to know Him intimately. We come to know Him through the study of His Word."

Is not definitively easy as is demonstrated right here even among the 4 mentioned by me above.

[DaveW]

The "5 Solas" were intended to separate Protestant theology from RCC theology. 
I urge anyone who is interested in the 5 Solas to read this book:

https://ffoz.com/the-five-solae-book.html

[NyawehNyoh]

.
• Matt 7:24-27 . . Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock.

. . . But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash."

Now, the thing is: if folks are poor at complying with the Sermon On The Mount in this life, then they likely won't do any better in the next-- and the next life is the one that matters most because it's permanent whereas this life is only temporary. So the challenge is to somehow transfer losers from this life into the next life fully willing, fully capable, and fully successful at complying with the Sermon On The Mount.

FAQ: If God has forgiven people's sins from first to last, plus even the sins they have yet to commit: isn't that enough to get them into Heaven?

REPLY: No.

FAQ: Why not?

REPLY: Because forgiven sinners are still sinners; and just as people have failed to fully comply with the Sermon On The Mount in this life; they will continue to fail in the next.

• Jer 13:23 . . Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? Then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.
_

[Rella]

.
• Matt 7:24-27 . . Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock.

. . . But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash."

Now, the thing is: if folks are poor at complying with the Sermon On The Mount in this life, then they likely won't do any better in the next-- and the next life is the one that matters most because it's permanent whereas this life is only temporary. So the challenge is to somehow transfer losers from this life into the next life fully willing, fully capable, and fully successful at complying with the Sermon On The Mount.

FAQ: If God has forgiven people's sins from first to last, plus even the sins they have yet to commit: isn't that enough to get them into Heaven?

REPLY: No.

FAQ: Why not?

REPLY: Because forgiven sinners are still sinners; and just as people have failed to fully comply with the Sermon On The Mount in this life; they will continue to fail in the next.

• Jer 13:23 . . Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? Then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.
_[/font]

Nicely stated until the Jer 13:23 example.

An odd little verse in a way. Or I should say the interpretations.

Stated as in the ESV
23  Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots?

Then also you can do good. who are accustomed to do evil.

Simply read we know an Ethiopian cannot change his skin or the leopard cannot change his spots , SO WHY would it be assumed with these as an example that you can also do good, who are accustomed to do evil?

King Jimmys men translated it

Jeremiah 13:23 — King James Version ( KJV 1900) 23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.  So  this is fairly similar to above....

NLT gets closer to being more understandable and seemingly more accurate.

Jeremiah 13:23 New Living Translation

23 Can an Ethiopian[a] change the color of his skin?   Can a leopard take away its spots?
Neither can you start doing good, for you have always done evil.

Even though the Interlinear is more in line with King Jimmy by saying" Then also you may do good who are accustomed to do evil."

This still reads as if something is very wrong. AND CERTAINLY IS NOT IN LINE WITH the rest of the chapter, which is of great chastisement.

OK... off my rant.  This just is one thorns in my shoe, so to speak.

If the intent was to tell them they have the capability of doing god but are not willing.... the leopard or Ethiopian examples
showing that they cannot change   

OK... Bye

P.S. One small add on.

From the LSV ( Literal Standard Version) ( I find this a fascinating interpretation of the entire bible)

LSV Jer 13:23

"Does a Cushite change his skin? And a leopard his spots? Can you also do good, who are accustomed to do evil?

Changes it into a question with the "Cushite and leopard ones and the obvious answer is no.

[4WD]

Because forgiven sinners are still sinners; and just as people have failed to fully comply with the Sermon On The Mount in this life; they will continue to fail in the next.

Never in the whole NT are the forgiven ever called sinners.  In the NT, at least, a sinner is not simply one who sins.  The sinner is the unforgiven.  That is not a stated fact, but it is, or should be, an apparent fact.  That should cause you to rethink your view on this subject.

[RB]

The "5 Solas" were intended to separate Protestant theology from RCC theology. 
I urge anyone who is interested in the 5 Solas to read this book:

I just glanced through the book online reading and truly was not impressed to be frank with you. He spent time trying to prove that both Catholics and Messianic Judaism had more right to understand the scriptures than all others outside of them do. Since they had BOTH relied upon TRADITIONS along with scriptures.

Correct me if I'm wrong, since I speed through the book (30 pages) in about 15 minutes.

[DaveW]

I just glanced through the book online reading and truly was not impressed to be frank with you. He spent time trying to prove that both Catholics and Messianic Judaism had more right to understand the scriptures than all others outside of them do. Since they had BOTH relied upon TRADITIONS along with scriptures.

Judaism - yes.  Not so much the RCC. 

The first sola was Sola Scriptura - by the scriptures alone.  Which is ironic since there is nothing in scripture to support that idea; making the rejection of tradition a tradition itself.   

Judaism has ALWAYS had a very high regard for tradition.  That includes the Jews of the late 2nd temple period - i.e. the Jewish authors of the New Testament.  With the dispersions of 70 ad and 135 ad, the Mishnah and Talmuds were written to preserve those traditions.   The Orthodox Church and later the RCC developed their own traditions which were intentionally DIFFERENT from the first century Jewish traditions.

Most of the book goes on to show that the solas are no more than specific treatises against the Roman Catholic Church.

And I do find - IN SCRIPTURE -  the people that are specifically tasked with interpreting scripture: 

Romans 3:1  Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? 2 Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God.

To entrust means they have the right to interpret.  This was written to a mixed congregation of Jewish and Gentile followers of Jesus.  It might be easy to write this off as referring ONLY to the OT, but since it is written to New Covenant believers, in the present tense, I think that is just a summary dismissal without merit.  Since the apostle is writing New Covenant scripture, that has to be included; and the only Jews qualified to interpret the New Covenant scriptures would be the Messianics.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

Judaism has ALWAYS had a very high regard for tradition.  That includes the Jews of the late 2nd temple period - i.e. the Jewish authors of the New Testament.  With the dispersions of 70 ad and 135 ad, the Mishnah and Talmuds were written to preserve those traditions.   The Orthodox Church and later the RCC developed their own traditions which were intentionally DIFFERENT from the first century Jewish traditions.

That last sentence is bass-ackwards.  It was Rabbi Akiva and the Tanaim (late 1st century Pharisees) who intentionally developed traditions and interpretations of Scripture to exclude followers of Christ from Judaism.  Pharisaic Jewish tradition starts in 90AD, and it looks very different from what came before it in the 2nd temple period.  Traditional Judaism is fundamentally anti-Christian and actually post-dates Christianity, being in some part a movement that reacted to ostracize Christians from being considered part of Judaism.

Don't get it wrong, though - I'm not against tradition.  Just be careful which tradition you're adopting.  If you want the authentic faith of the New Testament, the Syrian Orthodox church and the Copts are far closer than Judaism, which was largely born in Babylon and Spain centuries removed from the 2nd-temple period.

Jarrod

[DaveW]

That last sentence is bass-ackwards.  It was Rabbi Akiva and the Tanaim (late 1st century Pharisees) who intentionally developed traditions and interpretations of Scripture to exclude followers of Christ from Judaism.  Pharisaic Jewish tradition starts in 90AD, and it looks very different from what came before it in the 2nd temple period.  Traditional Judaism is fundamentally anti-Christian and actually post-dates Christianity, being in some part a movement that reacted to ostracize Christians from being considered part of Judaism.

There is an element of that to be sure.  But it is not all of the Tamudic writings; not even most or a sizable plurality.  Of the Tamudic writings, the original Mishnah has less of it (published circa 200 ad) than the Jerusalem or Babylonian Talmuds. 

Like anything else, find the meat and spit out the bones.