The Sabbath Day, Should You Keep or not Keep?

[mfblume]

Paul's Scientific Discovery of the Law of Sin and Death

Paul discovered through somewhat scientific means that sin dwelt within his flesh. He analyzed his situation as to why, when he tried doing the good deeds of the good law, that he always committed sin instead. The Law was, as it were, slaying him instead of causing him to do good. He looked at his efforts and looked at his failure and discovered there was a law just as Newton discovered the law of gravity.

Everywhere you drop an apple, whether in Germany, Japan or Iceland, it will fall. This means there is a law at work here. A principle. A law is a way things react whenever in the same circumstances. It happens everytime! And it works everywhere! The law of gravity.

Similarly, Paul discovered that everytime he willed to do good, he sinned instead. It became a new Law or principle to him. (Romans. 7:21).

This led him to understand that it was not himself that was inherently evil, since he desired to do good (Romans. 7:15-19). He, himself, consented that the law was good. He did not willingly rebel against it. He wanted to obey it. Therefore the reason he was not obeying it could not possibly be that he was rebelling against it. It was not him. The only conclusion Paul could draw was that something was in him. It was separate from him in the sense that it was not inherently him, but it was in him.

And since Paul found that this reaction of evil acts always took place when he exerted his flesh or self effort to do good works, he narrowed the thing down to discover its identity. Whatever it was, it worked when "he", himself in his own will power and self-exertion of the flesh, was motivated to work. That act of resorting to himself through the power of his flesh in order to do good was the culprit behind getting this alien element within him to rise up and make him do evil. Therefore it had to be in his "flesh."

Narrowing it down further he realized that the flesh contained something. It was certainly not a "good" thing as the Law was good. It might cause some to think the Law was bad, since trying to keep the Law seemed to always cause this evil to occur. But the Law was certainly not bad (Romans. 7:7). But that something in his flesh certainly was bad and not good at all.


"For I know that in my me (That is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing." (Romans. 7:18).

This is most scientific in a very spiritual manner! He called that something in his flesh by the name of "sin". And since he realized that exerting his flesh to work only stirred "sin" up, he had better find a different way in which to see the good deeds come forth through him. All he could think of was to call on God to deliver him from the flesh which held that sin! And that was exactly the answer!! (Romans. 7:24).

He realized that he, himself, delighted in the Law. But another law existed which he then discovered. And that Law warred against the good law that was in his mind, which he willed to obey. And this newly discovered law was actually bringing him into captivity to the Principle of sin.

When He called on God for help, God delivered him through Jesus Christ's death on the cross. Its as though we died to be free of the old cruel husband, since he wasn't going to die (Romans. 7:2-4). And we died, but yet lived on to enjoy the freedom from the old man that our deaths provided. How can this be? Well, we died by faith, believing that Christ died instead us.

So, Paul said God delivered him in Romans. 7:25.

And another Law that existed, which he then found to be the answer, was the reality of the effort to believe and thus walk after the strength of the Spirit rather than the strength of the flesh. And so long as we rely upon God to deliver us through faith in the fact that we died with Christ, we remain above the law of sin and death above that newly discovered law that explained why he could not do good. We must continually realize that we need to rely upon God's Spirit to keep us above sin, and not rely upon our weak human power of self effort to stop sinning.

As much as the law of aerodynamics teaches us that our presence in a certain shaped vehicle that is operating a certain way will keep us above the law of gravity and thus cheat the law of gravity, we can cheat the law of sin and death. And this higher law, the law that cheat sin and death, is called the law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus. We must be in Christ as much as one would need to be in an airplane to escape the law of gravity. And we are in Christ by having faith in His death for us! And that is what we must understand when we pray and close our prayers saying, "In the name of Jesus Christ."

[mfblume]

v.11. Several scholars I read are agreed that the better reading if this verse would be "No one is Justified before God by relying on The Law"

Galatians 3:11 KJV But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.

Okay, I believe that this verse is proving that Paul did not believe that people were Justified by The Torah, because The Torah had never been given for that purpose.

Paul did believe no one could be justified by law, but it really still was the purpose of Law. You inadvertently admit that when you insist works of the law in verse 10 are works of the flesh, because if they were works of the law of the old covenant, then you know Paul is saying anyone who tries to keep law will fail. that's the only interpretation to get from it if works of the law are of the old covenant law. So, Paul is actually summarizing his conclusions of verse 10 in verse 11. No one CAN keep law, which means the law of God that was ordained to give life could never be fulfilled. That means no one is justified by law. To be unable to keep it and gain life is not be unable to be justified by it.

Only Dispensationalists teach that God gave The Torah as a means for saving souls. That is not a Jewish understanding. Neither was it Paul's understanding, as I will show momentarily. Paul agreed with Hebrews 10:4.

That is not true. Paul flatly stated law could not be kept even though he delighted in law in his heart. This also disproves your allegation of the context of law. He said it was the ministration of condemnation engraved on stones.

Hebrews 10:4 KJV For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

Heb 10:4 implies nothing in my view to be error. The fact remains Law and its blood of animals TRIED to justify man. The reason I know this is because of the way Hebrews explains how the SITTING by Christ after his single sacrifice indicated an END of what He set out to do as opposed to the STANDING of priests never accomplishing what they set out to do. Hebrews says that they priests would have SAT DOWN as well if their work was accomplished. But because they remained STANDING and NEVER sitting down like Christ, their work was NEVER DONE. Why would Hebrews say the standing of the priests indicated the work was never done if that was not what they were working toward anyway? they worked toward sins being totally purged. Their work was never done because the Law's ordination to bring life could never actually occur.

Hebrews 10:9-12 KJV Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. (10) By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. (11) And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: (12) But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

Hebrews 9:25-26 KJV Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; (26) For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Hebrews 7:27 KJV Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

Please, understand that theologically, Judaism is "nomistic", observing The Law not as a means of Justification, but as a response to a gracious God, Who acts on behalf of His People and requires that they in turn identify themselves as His People by keeping His ordinances (covenantal nomism).

I think that falls under the concept of twisting the purpose of Law in a different way than pharisees twisted it. But yet it's similar in nature. Both pharisees and this NOMISTIC concept imply that no one be good enough by law for God, so in what you call the nomistic sense the same conclusion of not being justified by law is shared with the pharisees who never tried to live right, anyway.

If my view is correct, and works of the law are NOT works of the flesh, but a mirror of what Lev 18:5 says about the THINGS the law said to DO (work), then Law was certainly intended to grant righteousness by works.

Thus, Commandment-keeping does not refer to an individual's striving for Salvation, but to a religious mode of existence, marked out by certain religious practices that demonstrate the individual's covenant relationship.

But you also said that Lev 18:5 indicated a sort of faith-based works. And if LIFE was the reward for this work, how can you say law was not meant to save them? Was there no righteous living before the Cross ever encouraged at all, as though it would not come til Christ came, anyway, with no inkling that righteousness was required in the old testament?

What is more, I believe that when Paul said, "No one is justified" he meant NO ONE of ANY AGE: past, present, or future.

Since I believe I showed your use of WORKS OF THE LAW to be in error, I feel this is also incorrect, obviously. Paul meant whoever tries, in any age (agreed on that point) cannot succeed, because God gave a law they could not keep.

The Law NEVER justified.

But it was ordained to do so. That's what giving life meant in Leviticus 18:5.

Even under the times of ancient Israel, people were justified by trusting faith. And Paul quotes from The Hebrew Scriptures to back up his Justification by Faith doctrine (Hab. 2:4).

No, that is not why Paul quoted that verse. He quoted that verse to show that Lev 18:5 could not be fulfilled, and noted that those under law even stated so! And the FAITH Habakkuk spoke about was unavailable back then. That's why Paul also said in Gal 3 that they were shut out form the FAITH that was to LATER COME.

Galatians 3:23 KJV But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

I know, there are some individuals on this forum that disagree with me, and insist that The Law was the means for Justification under the Old Testament Dispensation. Well, that is there opinion. I encourage everyone else, please, examine this Passage and see if I am not exegeting this in context.

According to context and use of the term works of the law by Paul, you are in error.

Thanks again for your words, and I will continue as you proceed in your other notes I have not responded to yet.

[mfblume]

v.12. This is Mike's favorite verse to quote in this conversation.

Yup!

This is the verse that he claims teaches that faith had nothing to do with The Law, but that "Eternal Life" was earned by obedience to The Law by people under the "Old" Testament.

This verse does NOT at all teach what these folks are claiming. Actually, Paul here is simply restating exactly what he just said in the preceding verse using different wording.
Take note:
*"And The Law is not of faith", this parallels what he said in verse 11, ". . . no man is justified by Law. . ."
*"The man that doeth them shall live in them", parallels what he said in verse 11, "the just shall live by faith".

That cannot be true, again, because if you keep reading in Gal 3 the FAITH that justifies us was SHUT UP away from the people in the old covenant and was simply not available for them in their day.

Galatians 3:23 KJV But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

It was not even revealed to them in that day. So, Lev 18:5 cannot be talking about this faith in context of Gal 3, for the faith in Gal 3 was not revealed yet and they were shut up away from it in that day. This would make Lev 18:5 a lie in that it would be saying they're not cursed if they live by faith, but yet that faith was not even available to them in that day.

Mike keeps trying to claim that when the verse reads to "live" in the Commandments means "Eternal Life", as if in ancient Israel, Eternal Life was gained through obedience to Torah. Salvation by Works. He insists that this was the meaning of the verse quoted here by Paul: Lev.18:5.

That is taking the verse out of context. The verse was not talking about spiritual life, but life here-and-now.

No. You're missing my point. It was LIFE in the here and now, but not in the way you think.
Paul says that the LIFE ordained by law keeping was something else:

Romans 7:10 KJV And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

It was life in the here and now, but it was eternal life they'd earn in the here and now that was the result of justification, Raffi. How can Ro 7:10 apply to your view? Paul is citing Lev 18:5 here as much as he is in Gal 3. And the life Paul saw in Leviticus is contrasted from the death he experienced in failure. And all of that was speaking about the same thing Paul said in Galatians 5 where if you fail in one point of the law then you are as though you failed everything in it.

Galatians 5:1-3 KJV Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. (2) Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. (3) For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

Deuteronomy 27:26 KJV Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them. And all the people shall say, Amen.

.
And instead of LIFE in the here and now, Paul was under condemnation. And THAT is the condemnation of Ro 8:1 that we are not under if we cease walking after the flesh by obeying law to serve God rather than walk after the Spirit and thereby see God cause us to live right with Christ actually living through us.

In EVERY comparable verse of the same teaching, it is talking about life in this world (Deut.4:1; Neh.9:29; Ez.18:9; 20:11,13,21). And I do not believe that Paul was trying to twist this or any other Passage to claim that Eternal Life had EVER been a matter of Works Righteousness. It is impossible for a man to earn Salvation by works, in this or ANY Age, and God knew that.

Law was intended to bring salvation by works, and God planned for people to be unable to do so because Law came to TEACH us a grave lesson.... we need grace!

[mfblume]

v.13. Messiah did not redeem us from The Law of God, he redeemed us from the "Curse of The Law". Look again at verse 10.

v.14. This is a particularly interesting point, where Paul's theology believed that "faith" came in with ABRAHAM's Covenant (see vv. 6 and 7). Just as "faith" was part of Abraham's qualification for his receiving of the Promise, Paul sees the present reception of The Promise by the Gentiles to be by the same mode as it was for Abraham, through Jesus Christ. Thus, like Abraham, we receive the Promise THROUGH FAITH. NOT through works.

Right, but the fact remains that this FAITH was sort of put on HOLD until Christ should come. It did not continue from Abraham throughout the period of law before Christ came.

Watch:

Galatians 3:14 KJV That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.


Galatians 3:18 KJV For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

Galatians 3:22-23 KJV But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that [b ]the promise by faith[/b] 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 be revealed.

The promise by faith of Jesus is the promise given to Abraham, and it is by faith that was shut away from people from that day with Abraham UNTIL CHRIST CAME.

vv.15-17. This verse tells us that Abraham's Covenant could not be disannulled. That's pretty interesting, because there are theological opinions that try to tell us that every new dispensational covenant cancels out (disannuls) its preceding covenant. Yet, here, Paul says that The Law did NOT set aside Abraham's Covenant.

WAIT!!! There is a huge difference between setting aside what was given to Abraham and disannulling something. It plainly said the promise was by faith and given to Abraham and his seed, which is Christ. Not to anyone else between Abraham and Christ. And faith came when Christ came. This means that FAITH was given to Abraham, applicable to no one since Abraham UNTIL CHRIST. Os it was set aside in that sense. But more correctly it was only applicable to Abraham and Christ. And then Paul said that because we are in Christ, then we are counted as the seed which is Christ.


Galatians 3:29 KJV And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Disannulling something is voiding it and making it non existent. Putting something aside until a later time is not disannullment.

Why is knowing that important? Because it suggests to us that FAITH was present even at the coming of The Law of Moses.

No. Definitely no. Read it again.

Abraham was given PROMISE and he had FAITH.

Galatians 3:8-9 KJV And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. (9) So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

And then we read the LAW had nothing to do with faith like you propose.

Galatians 3:12 KJV And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.

The LAW was not of faith but rather DOING. That is the stress Paul is making in once again citing Lev 18:5. The contrast is DOING versus BELIEVING. And once again this also proves your concept of DOING in Lev 18:5 to be incorrect. Paul said the DOING in Lev 18:5 has nothing to do with faith. He flatly stated it.

And because he already established that law had nothing to do with faith in verse 12, some might tend to think that LAW done away with anything to do with faith forevermore. Paul predicted people would assume he might mean faith has nothing to do with serving God because Law came. So he quickly set out to ensure no one get that from his words by saying:

Galatians 3:16-17 KJV Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. (17) And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

Since verse 12 said law is not of faith, and yet Abraham was given a promise by faith, Paul then stated the promise was not made of none effect. THE PROMISE was still in effect, but PUT ON HOLD.

Galatians 3:18 KJV For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

Then he says the law cannot provide what the promise would, because law is all about DOING in order to EARN. So if we had to EARN what the promise referred to, then it would not be a promise. You do not earn what you are promised to be given. But God made a promise to Abraham that was totally apart from the earning nature of the Law.

Galatians 3:19 KJV Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

So, if the law is nothing to do with promise or faith, and yet God gave a promise to Abraham due to his faith, why in the world did God send law after that time? It was ONLY BECAUSE OF TRANSGRESSIONS. And it was a temporary deal, that was never intended to remain forever, and would EXPIRE when Christ came to whom the promise was made which included Him with Abraham getting the promise.

And this shows us that LAW, not Promise, was done away with. What did he mean "because of transgressions" ? It's the same thing Paul said in Romans.

Romans 3:19-20 KJV Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. (20) Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Romans 4:15 KJV Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.


Romans 5:20-21 KJV Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: (21) That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

Law came to make sin abound and work wrath due to transgressions. That's why Gal 3 mentions it came because of transgressions.

And notice the context of Law being temporary UNTIL the seed should come. Then PROMISE kicks back into effect once again, and the FAITH that was shut out and put aside during the time of law, is then revealed when the SEED COMES. And that context leads to this:

Galatians 3:24-25 KJV 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 a schoolmaster.

It's all self-explaining.

v.18. Here is part of the confusion for some people. In these two verses, I think the context shows that he is talking now about The Law of God/The Torah. The Inheritance is NOT by The Torah. If the Inheritance was by Torah-keeping, then that would have annulled the Abrahamic Covenant.

Correct. But he is not explaining this because of what you think. He is explaining that faith was present for the promise with Abraham,. then SHUT AWAY during the entire time of law because law is not of faith, and then REINSTATED again when Christ comes. So, that's why the New Covenant is actually the covenant of Abraham, as well as David which is another point.

But since The Torah did not annul The Abrahamic Covenant, the Inheritance still comes by the same way it came to Abraham, namely "belief" (Gal.3:6), that is "faith". And of course, keep in mind that we are to understand "faith" in Hebraic sense as Saving Faith.

Nope. Faith in this sense Paul says it is the faith that was absent during the time of Law.

Galatians 3:12 KJV And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.

v.19. continues the context of "law" here as The Law of God. Here he says, The Law was added "UNTIL the Seed . . . had come". Because of this, many claim that Paul is saying that The Law was to exist only until The Seed (the Messiah) came. implying that when Messiah comes, The Law is done.

That's exactly what Paul was saying. Why? Because Law stopped the presence of faith that was provided in the time of Abraham. Law is not of faith. Abraham's promise was of faith. Not Law. So, that which stopped faith did not disannull it as though faith and promise would not be reinstated later. Once law was out of the way again, faith and promise were reinstated, because the promise was not to Abraham and everyone after him until Christ. The promise was only to Abraham and Christ. And all the law between those two DID NOT HAVE THAT FAITH. Once faith kicks in again, because law was only added due to transgressions, law is now gone.

This has to be the answer, because otherwise the faith that comes with promise would have been available to everyone between Abraham and Jesus including those who were under law. And Paul would not have used the words SHUT UP in association with faith if faith was still present in time of Law. the faith that people were shut up away from during law was the faith that comes with promise and manifested in Abraham. And it was not in effect as a covenant again til Christ. So, the inception of a covenants when law came into effect did not involve faith like it did with Abraham. That faith of Abraham's covenant came back into effect not before Christ came.

But Paul does not say here that The Seed cancels or ends The Law once he comes. Only that The Law had something to do with transgressions, until The Seed comes

Right. But the transgressions mentioned in Romans 4:15. Law came so sin and transgressions that result would abound! It was all a grand lesson! You cannot serve God by earning righteousness. That is a HUGE part of law.

continued...

[mfblume]

Whatever The Law had to do with transgressions, it only lasted till The Seed came. Once The Seed arrived, The Law's responsibility toward transgression shifted, but without CANCELLING The Law. It just entered into a new relationship with transgression.

No. Law passed. Law was done away, the ministration of condemnation written and engraved on stones faded into non-existence. That does not mean prohibitions against sin passed away. It mean the way to handle sinful living and stop it was no longer through obeying commands engraved on stones. It would stop by God's Spirit CAUSING one to live a righteous life and seeing imputed righteousness live through us in activity. LAW was a method of serving God. Obeying books' commandments. Grace is altogether different but provides the same righteousness law TRIED TO BUT COULD NOT provide.

If Paul taught that The Seed would come to END The Law, he would be in contradiction with MANY, MANY places of Scripture, such as Psalm 119:89,

Psalms 119:89 KJV LAMED. For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.


How?

That simply says the things law said were sins are still sins. But Law is more than that. It's a method to serve God that Paul called walking after the flesh.
Psalms 119:152 KJV Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them for ever.

Still this is not the point you're trying to make. You are taking these all out of context. And Paul was saying the righteousness of the law is still what God wants. But we just do not live it through law-keeping.

I am sure all the other verses you cite are likewise taken out of context. None of these verses say law will not be done away with and expire after its rightful purpose is fulfilled. They only state law was correct in what it deemed was sin and what was not.

v.21. The Law is not contrary to the Covenant of Abraham.

Who said it was? It's just not inclusive of faith that Abraham's promise was.

Man, pay particularly close attention to this verse. Paul here clearly says something that proves that The Law had no power to impart Eternal Life.
Notice, the past-tense of the verse.

v.22. Paul introduces the concept that everything is under the control of "sin". The NIV says, "locked up under sin".

Galatians 3:22 KJV But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

In other words, "sin" puts us in bondage. It does not say that "everything is locked up under the control of The Law".

I agree! Your words are not refuting my point. I think this shows how you are missing something. SIN is what locks us up. But SIN USES LAW to do it! Like an assassin's weapon. if we never had sin, we could do all the law said and earn righteousness. But the righteousness law tried to lead us to, but could not, is provided in a way apart from law. Grace through faith. Sin in our flesh made law ineffective. Christ dealt with the force of sin where law was ineffective against it.

And people keeping law were locked up away from FAITH. Sin locked them up, but law locked them up away from faith.

This is a key to interpreting the next chapter.
v.23. This verse is the parallel to the previous verse. The "law" here cannot be The Law of God, it MUST be the "law of sin" in agreement with the preceding verse.

No.

Galatians 3:23 KJV But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

This is the same law that we read about earlier in the same chapter:

Galatians 3:12-13 KJV And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. (13) 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:

Law is about DOING it is not about FAITH. Faith is being contrasted from the doing that is mentioned in Lev 18:5. This shows your thoughts on Lev 18:5 cannot be correct, for you said the doing is by faith, when Paul flatly stated the opposite.

v.24. If this is right, we have been misinterpreting the nature of the "schoolmaster". We have been teaching that the "schoolmaster" was The Law of God/The Torah. I propose that we have been wrong. The "schoolmaster" is not The Law of God, but the "law of sin",

Wow, brother. You are really getting away from truth here. I know you are sincere, but you are so far away from truth because of how Paul uses the concept of Law as a tutor.

Galatians 3:25 KJV But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

UNDER a schoolmaster is the same as being UNDER law, because the Law is the schoolmaster. And you just said the term UNDER THE LAW means under the curses the law of the old covenant listed. So if the term LAW in the curse of the LAW meant the Old Covenant law in Deut., then under the schoolmaster means under the law, which means the schoolmaster is Old Covenant law.

Again watch:

Galatians 3:23 KJV But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

The law under which Israel was kept was old covenant law, because it excluded them from faith. And that was the LAW that came after Abraham's promise was given, when we read the LAW IS NOT OF FAITH.

Galatians 3:11-12 KJV But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. (12) And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.

You just said the LAW of the old covenant was not meant to make us righteous, though I disagree. But at least you know the law of the old covenant is the issue when we read about failure to make us righteous. Well, that is the SAME LAW noted in verse 12 when it says the LAW IS NOT OF FAITH. How can verse 12 be about old covenant law that is not of faith when we later read the same concept in Paul saying those under the law were shut up away from the faith to later be revealed?

Galatians 3:18 KJV For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

Paul said the same law of old covenant that was not of faith, which excluded old covenant adherents from faith, was not the means for inheritance. And you agree that law is not the law of sin and death. But Paul was explaining that this is the reason adherents to the law were excluded from faith. Law that excludes one from faith because law is not of faith, is the same law that people are under UNTIL Christ comes. Verse 23 is talking about the same law that verse 12 and verse 18 are speaking about! They both are showing old covenant law adherence cuts one off from faith.

'
'until Messiah comes to free us from that law. The Greek word is PAIDAGOGOS, and scholars have debated the meaning of the word for centuries. In fact, at least one suggested interpretation is that the word could better be translated as "jailmaster".
That hardly describes The Law of God.

v.25. At any rate, however we translate "paidagogos", ths verse tells us that under faith, we are no longer under its bondage. We are no longer under the "jailmaster". I believe this means we are no longer under the "law of sin" and the Curse of The Law.

It aptly describes law of old covenant because law is not of faith in verse 12, and verse 18's note of how law is not of promise which requires faith. Brother, you know promise requires faith. And how can law involve faith if promise is associated with faith and the law is not of faith?
Law of God is definitely a jailmaster because it did not preach salvation by faith in the promise in order to receive the promise, and it kept people away from the promise until it was done away with and Christ reinstated the promise by faith when he came.

[Esaias]

"That simply says the things law said were sins are still sins."

Then Sabbath-breaking is still sin. Doing one's ordinary work on the seventh day, and not separating that day unto God apart from the other six days, is still sin.

"The law under which Israel was kept was old covenant law, because it excluded them from faith."

So, nobody could be saved from Mt Sinai until Jesus came? David, the prophets, the judges, nobody during the days of the Old Covenant will be saved? If being under the old covenant law excluded them from faith, then it excluded them from eternal life, and therefore nobody from Moses to Christ will be saved.

But we know that's not the case.

Therefore, something is wrong with your doctrine.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Esaias

"That simply says the things law said were sins are still sins."

Then Sabbath-breaking is still sin.

Yep! The REAL sabbath must not be broken. Jesus is our rest and we cannot violate that by being made perfect by the flesh. After all, and I told you this before, sabbath is a shadow of the body of Christ.

Do you actually believe the works of the law are works of the flesh like our good brother Raffi believes?

"The law under which Israel was kept was old covenant law, because it excluded them from faith."

So, nobody could be saved from Mt Sinai until Jesus came? David, the prophets, the judges, nobody during the days of the Old Covenant will be saved? If being under the old covenant law excluded them from faith, then it excluded them from eternal life, and therefore nobody from Moses to Christ will be saved.

But we know that's not the case.

Therefore, something is wrong with your doctrine.

Sorry, I disagree. Galatians 3 plainly says the law is not of the faith that Abraham had when he received the promise. And that Promise was only to HIM AND HIS SEED. And that seed was Christ. So, until Christ came there was no one else except Abraham who had the faith.

And when Christ died and made atonement, only until THEN did David enter glory. Before that point in time he was in Sheol where both righteous and unrighteous were. And those that were under the old covenant were redeemed by Christ and his atonement. So God finally saw that applied to David and the others, putting David and all old covenant adherents IN CHRIST. But not until Christ made atonement.

Hebrews 9:15 KJV And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Was the faith and promise to Abraham and his Seed Christ alone, or not?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Yep! The REAL sabbath must not be broken. Jesus is our rest and we cannot violate that by being made perfect by the flesh. After all, and I told you this before, sabbath is a shadow of the body of Christ.

Jesus is not the Sabbath. The Bible plainly identifies the SEVENTH DAY (of every week) as the Sabbath of Jehovah our God. And as you stated, what the law said is sin, is still sin. The law declared doing ordinary work on the seventh day and not hallowing that day as devoted to God is sin. So, according to your own affirmation, that is still sin today.

And, I already showed you before the Bible nowhere says "the Sabbath is a shadow of the body of Christ". It is a shadow of THINGS TO COME.

Do you actually believe the works of the law are works of the flesh like our good brother Raffi believes?

I think you are confused, your question doesn't make sense to me. The works of the flesh are sins, as defined by the law of God.

Sorry, I disagree. Galatians 3 plainly says the law is not of the faith that Abraham had when he received the promise. And that Promise was only to HIM AND HIS SEED. And that seed was Christ. So, until Christ came there was no one else except Abraham who had the faith.

You just agreed with my assessment of your doctrine, except to extended it all the way back to Abraham now. So now Isaac and Jacob are lost in their sins! And Joseph, Moses, Aaron, the Hebrew midwives, the Judges, the prophets, David, Samuel, Josiah, Hezekiah, everybody, all of them, dead in sins and with no hope of eternal life. That is what your statements actually conclude in.

And when Christ died and made atonement, only until THEN did David enter glory. Before that point in time he was in Sheol where both righteous and unrighteous were. And those that were under the old covenant were redeemed by Christ and his atonement. So God finally saw that applied to David and the others, putting David and all old covenant adherents IN CHRIST. But not until Christ made atonement.

Purgatory doctrine, plain and simple. Christ applied His redeeming blood to people who HAD NO FAITH, according to you. They are saved WITHOUT FAITH, according to you. Preposterous, brother!

Hebrews 9:15 KJV And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Redemption of the transgressions, not transgressors. Read it again. The verse is saying Christ mediates a New covenant to take care of the sins that could not be taken care of by the old covenant. The ritual slaughter of animals could not take away sins, it never made those people sanctified in heart and life. BUT THAT DOESNT MEAN THE OLD TESTAMENT SAINTS COULD NOT HAVE FAITH.

Is there ANYONE else who believes NOBODY from Abraham had or ever COULD have faith in God, until Christ came? And that Christ redeemed unfaithful sinners after their death? Seriously?

Wow. You've gone off the rails, brother!

Was the faith and promise to Abraham and his Seed Christ alone, or not?

What does that have to do with it? According to you, apparently NOBODY had faith, and NOBODY therefore COULD be saved - EVER. Except to avoid that you have invented an old testament Purgatory of sorts, where dead unfaithful sinners are just prest-o! chang-o! carted off to heaven????

I'm blown away. There is so much wrong with this I'm not quite sure where to even begin.

[Esaias]

According to this bizarre version of Purgatory doctrine, you have David going into heaven upon the Atonement.

But that is not apostolic doctrine. Peter, a bona fide apostolic preacher, declared (some 50 days AFTER atonement was made, some 10 days AFTER Jesus ascended to heaven) very plainly that David IS NOT ASCENDED INTO HEAVEN. At that time ONLY CHRIST had ascended into heaven.

Brother Blume, I notice that there are a collection of errors you have that are leading you to other errors. One error begets another. Your error concerning the state of the dead has led to this bizarre error concerning the OT saints. And your error concerning the fourth commandment has led you to the error of antinomianism. These are, apparently, connected in your system of doctrine, leading you to repeatedly make erroneous statements. A little leaven is leavening the whole lump.

I would suggest that perhaps your foundation is offset, perhaps not plumbed quite right, the square was bent, the level had a bend in it, or something.

Because your conclusions are just really, really out there.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Jesus is not the Sabbath. The Bible plainly identifies the SEVENTH DAY (of every week) as the Sabbath of Jehovah our God. And as you stated, what the law said is sin, is still sin. The law declared doing ordinary work on the seventh day and not hallowing that day as devoted to God is sin. So, according to your own affirmation, that is still sin today.

We've already discussed this. I know what you think of Col 2, and I believe he is the true Sabbath, as he said come to him and he would give us rest.

And, I already showed you before the Bible nowhere says "the Sabbath is a shadow of the body of Christ". It is a shadow of THINGS TO COME.

And I already showed you that THINGS TO COME were from the perspective of time when the old covenant was instituted and spoke the things that were to come when the cross and Christ woudl come.

I think you are confused, your question doesn't make sense to me. The works of the flesh are sins, as defined by the law of God.

Raffi said the "works of the law" are not deeds the Old Covenant law commanded. So I asked if you agree with that. He said the works of the law are sins when we read ..

Galatians 3:10 KJV 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.

What are those works of the law to you?

You just agreed with my assessment of your doctrine, except to extended it all the way back to Abraham now. So now Isaac and Jacob are lost in their sins!

Why is it you never answer my questions and I answer yours?

No one was saved til Jesus made atonement. No one, including David. And all those people were atoned for and THEN SAVED when Christ made the atonement.

Now, I ask again, are you saying the promise and the faith toward them was available t more than Abraham and HIS SEED Christ, or not?

Do you believe this verse or not?

Galatians 3:16 KJV Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

And Joseph, Moses, Aaron, the Hebrew midwives, the Judges, the prophets, David, Samuel, Josiah, Hezekiah, everybody, all of them, dead in sins and with no hope of eternal life. That is what your statements actually conclude in.

No and you are not reading anything I am saying for you to state that.

I said no one before Jesus had faith except Abraham. And the promise God gave to Him for which he had faith was ONLY for Abraham and His seed CHRIST. And for the second time I am telling you that when Christ made atonement, THEN and not before then were David all the people before the cross actually SAVED. For they were put in Christ just as we are when we obey our covenant, because their covenants held shadows of what we have in substance and God counted them as being in Christ like he does with us when we obey the gospel. So, what do you mean I claim they had no hope? I just told you earlier than Christ redeemed them and made atonement for them.

Purgatory doctrine, plain and simple. Christ applied His redeeming blood to people who HAD NO FAITH, according to you.

No, and you are being disengenuous to not follow my reasoning and explanation of the promise with the associated faith that is mentioned in context of Gal 3 that was ONLY to ABRAHAM and his SINGLE SEED.

So, be civil and answer my questions, too, like I am answering yours.

They are saved WITHOUT FAITH, according to you. Preposterous, brother!

Only in your twisted version of what I am saying.

Redemption of the transgressions, not transgressors.

Hebrews 9:15 KJV And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Transgressions committed under the first covenant were dealt with by Christ's mediatorial role in His atonement. Anyone who committed transgressions in that time were atoned for. Atonement was made for any transgressions committed under that first covenant. And transgressions are committed by transgressors so that once the redemption occurs because of those transgressions, they transgressors are atoned for.

Read it again. The verse is saying Christ mediates a New covenant to take care of the sins that could not be taken care of by the old covenant.

It covers both old testament people's transgressions and new covenant people.

The ritual slaughter of animals could not take away sins, it never made those people sanctified in heart and life. BUT THAT DOESNT MEAN THE OLD TESTAMENT SAINTS COULD NOT HAVE FAITH.

Yes it does because the LAW IS NOT OF FAITH. Now, what does that mean to you when you read Gal 3:12?

Galatians 3:12 KJV And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.

That FAITH is what was referring to Abraham and his covenant. And law is not of faith but that did not disanul the promise Abraham had faith in. In other words, the law was not a time of faith. And that faith in context is the faith Abraham had, which is then why we read that promise was to Abraham and his single Seed, Christ. So, tell me how the law is not of faith, and the faith it is talking about was the faith Abraham had in the promise, and how that fits in with the concept that only Abraham and his seed Christ has that promise to have faith in?

Is there ANYONE else who believes NOBODY from Abraham had or ever COULD have faith in God, until Christ came? And that Christ redeemed unfaithful sinners after their death? Seriously?

Give me a break. You refuse to answer my questions and ignorr all I say about the issue, and those questions focus on why I said what I did.

Wow. You've gone off the rails, brother!

Read Galatians 3 correctly today and see my point.

What does that have to do with it? According to you, apparently NOBODY had faith, and NOBODY therefore COULD be saved - EVER. Except to avoid that you have invented an old testament Purgatory of sorts, where dead unfaithful sinners are just prest-o! chang-o! carted off to heaven????

WOw, brother attack the sabbath keeping to you and you go hog-wild with insults and attacks. I noticed that more than once.

I'm blown away. There is so much wrong with this I'm not quite sure where to even begin.

You never understood Gal 3. But that makes sense because if you did understand it you would know law is done away with.

Alas, ah well.