Re: Paul and The Law
- From: Bible Believer <noway@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 12:31:31 -0800
On 9 Feb 2007 18:35:07 -0800, "Rob" <reisenhauer@xxxxxxxxx>
I hope this finds you all well and in good spirit.
Thank you. And please do not take my post as an attack.
I mean only to be direct, not mean (even though it may
seem that way) and to help shed some light on this subject.
There is a great deal of confusion surrounding
the letters of Paul, specifically as they relate to
The Law. Many wrongly believe that Paul told
us He was free from living by The Law and could
do as he pleased. Nothing could be further from
False dichotomy. Being "free from the Law" does not mean
"do whatever one wants to". It means living under grace
and having liberty in Christ. Doing whatever one wants to,
would be license and that isn't what a real Christian would
Romans 7:25 I thank God through Jesus Christ
our Lord. So then with the mind (Being) I myself
serve The Law of God; but with the flesh (human)
the law of sin.
Intentionally out of context quote. (: Paul called the Law
of the Mosaic Covenant, "the law of sin and death". This
means that it does not bring life. It never did and never
could. So how does trying to follow it give us eternal
life? It can't!
1) There is therefore now no condemnation to them
which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh,
but after the Spirit.
2) For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath
made me free from the law of sin and death.
We fulfill the moral guidelines of the Law in our walk.
That comes naturally, but it does not mean that we are
under the Law.
The Law brought sin and death, not life.
"The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin
is the law." - 1 Corinthians 15:56
Furthermore, the Law was a schoolmaster, before
Christ came. And once Christ came, there was no
further need for a schoolmaster.
21) Is the law then against the promises of God?
God forbid: for if there had been a law given which
could have given life, verily righteousness should
have been by the law.
22) But the Scripture hath concluded all under sin,
that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be
given to them that believe.
23) But before faith came, we were kept under the
law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards
24) Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring
us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25) But after that faith is come, we are no longer under
Now how do these passages fit in with your "we must
live by the Law" doctrine??? It simply does not! (:
Paul did not do as he (his human "self") pleased.
He followed The Example of Christ-Jesus, Who
is the fulfillment of the Scriptures/The Word.
Christ-Jesus was The Word made flesh and
The Law IS The Word.
Nowhere does the Bible say, "The Law is the Word".
They are inseparable. The Old and New Covenants
are IN HARMONY with each other (please see
Rev. 14:3, 15:3).
I'm sorry, that's impossible. One states animal sacrifice
for sin repeatedly and the other states a one time
sacrifice of Jesus Christ for our sins. And neither
of those verses say one word about what you claimed.
God and Christ do not have conflicting messages
nor did Christ come to supersede God Previous
Instructions (The Law).
"For if that first covenant had been faultless, then
should no place have been sought for the second."
- Hebrews 8:7
To claim that we must follow the Law is to claim that
we must erect the Levitical priesthood again. But what
does the Scripture say?
"If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood,
(for under it the people received the law,) what further
need was there that another priest should rise after the
order of Melchizedek, and not be called after the order
of Aaron?" - Hebrews 7:11
You don't get to "pick and choose" from the Law and erect
your own brand of "following the Law". Either you follow
the Law; all of the Law, or you are not following the Law!
This is a very simple truth!
Christ fulfilled the Law and it is therefore passed. But if
you want to believe otherwise, then go ahead and find
a Levitical priest and start performing some sacrifices
for sin. As I said, the Law passed, which means that
heaven and earth passed (which was not a physically
literal statement that spoke of the planet and heavens,
but referred to the Mosaic system, with its Temple,
as Jews back then knew).
You people that preach the Law fail to realize that
if the Law is in effect, that means that *ALL* of
the Law is in effect, not just the parts you wish
to pick and choose and claim we must adhere to.
You CANNOT have faith in God and continue
to disobey The Law.
To obey God today, is to live in grace, not under
the Law and the Bible is clear about that, as Paul
said about the works of the Law. This does not
mean that we are free to live in an evil manner.
That would be license. What Paul preached was
liberty. One must understand that the word
"works" is used in two different ways in the Bible.
The works of the Law and plain old good deeds.
Paul used the word in both ways in the following
passages and said that it is not by the works of
the Law that we are saved, but we are saved
"unto" (or "for", depending on which translation)
good works. Note the time line there, that the
word "unto" (for) brings into it.
Saved by grace, through faith and not by works
and then good works will follow.
8) For by grace you have been saved through faith,
and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
9) *NOT* of works, lest anyone should boast.
10) For we are His workmanship, created in Christ
Jesus unto good works, which God prepared
beforehand that we should walk in them.
The fact is, if you are obeying the Law, then you are
spitting in Christ's face and saying that His sacrifice
was meaningless, since it was for all sins, for all time.
You CANNOT accept the New Covenant in Jesus'
Blood and continue to disobey The Law.
Then why did Paul blast Peter for hypocritically
pretending to live under the Law when James
came around, since he (Peter) normally lived
as a Gentile would? Paul did not blast Peter
because he lived as a Gentile would, but rather,
because he hypocritically pretended to live as
a strict Jew would, when James came around.
Now how do you explain that???
And why did Paul write the following, to the church
in Galatia, in response to Jews who came into the
church and were trying to tell people the very same
thing that you're claiming here?
1) O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that
you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes
Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as
2) This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive
the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of
3) Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit,
are you now being made perfect by the flesh?
So now I ask you the same question.
Who has bewitched you?
14:15 If ye love me, KEEP my COMMANDments.
And He gave two of them.
Paul speaks often about no longer being "under
The Law" or "under the curse of The Law".
That would then mean that the Law is no longer
in place. If the Law is in place, then so is the
possibility of the curse of the Law.
And to follow the Law, is to willingly place yourself
back under it, which means that you make the curse
a possibility for yourself.
As Paul said about those who wish to claim that
we are under the Law...
"For as many as are of the works of the law are under
the curse." - Galatians 3:10a
You people who preach the Law are hypocrites!
You think you can just pick and choose which
parts of it you can claim that we must follow.
"Well, we have to follow the Law, but there is
no more curse of the Law."
Well then, that means that there is no more blessing
for following it either.
"We have to follow the Law. Oh, but not those parts
about animal sacrifice, or clothing of one cloth, etc."
Well then, since you claim that Paul said that we must
follow the Law, tell us please, where did he give a list
of which parts and say not to follow the other parts?
Surely if he was saying what you claim, he would
most definitely list the Laws out for us and tell us
which ones needed to be followed and which ones
And FYI, after you read this and know that what I said
is correct and get angry at me for pointing out your
error here, don't bother responding by saying that
I promote license. I do not! I promote liberty, even
as James said and I do promote living for the Lord.
So if you have that type of attack, in which you try
to ascribe thoughts to me that I did not express,
to try to distract people from what was actually said,
because you have no rebuttal for it (and you don't),
don't bother. I'm not saying you would do that,
but given the way usenet is, I said it just in case.
Hope is for those who do not live in grace.
The Bible is the inerrant word of the living God!
If you don't believe the Bible, don't tell me that
you are a Christian. I won't believe you. To make
that claim, is to be a heretic who does not know God.
- Re: Paul and The Law
- From: Rob
- Re: Paul and The Law
- Paul and The Law
- From: Rob
- Paul and The Law