What is the Atonement?

[doctorj]

Can anyone help me with "The Atonement". Is the Atonement relevant to us today? Or is it an Old Testament idea that was superseded at the cross?

[Fausto]

Budy

The atonement is relevant to us today!

It is linked to the sanctuary service understanding, what the priests used to do then, with the two goats to go and clean the sanctuary is now being done by Jesus in what we adventists call the investigative judgement.

The difference is:

The two goats then used to be chosen by lots (one for the Lord which was slaughtered and its blood was used to be sprinkled on the mercy seat and in front of it, the other was "Azazel" which represented the devil, on whose head the sins where placed by the priest "symbolically" then released into the wilderness)

Since 1844 (the end of the 2300 days [years] prophecy), Christ has entered the holy of holies (with his blood instead of the goat) and started the investigative judgement thus making atonement for our sins as we live our lifes until we either die or are caught up with the dead in Christ at his second coming.

Quote:

1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

1Th 4:18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

Azazel - this time the devil himself will be "chained" to the abyss (desolate earth - as no one will be left alive, the dead in christ will rise and those who are alive and are Christ's will be taken up and will join Christ) and will be left in the "wilderness" for 1000 years.

Quote:

Rev 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.

Rev 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

Rev 20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

Hope this makes some sense, its a quick explanation.

[Gerr]

Atonement lies at the heart of God's plan to save sinful man, so it is just as relevant now as it was in OT times. As I understand it, the basic meaning of the Hebrew word translated as atonement is to cover. A holy and righteous God who can not countenance evil (Hab 1:13) has been offended. In simplistic terms then, atonement is the cover up of the offense so that the offender can be accepted back into favor with the offended one. That's where the Cross comes in. While God is love, He is also a just Judge who must deal with the offense/sin. The blood/life sacrificed on the Cross was His accepted method to deal with it. Jesus died the death that I deserved for the offense/sin as my Substitute so that I can receive the life/treatment that He deserved, to be received by faith.

Atonement is found only once in the KJV in the NT found in Rom 5:11. Most of the literal translations render it as "reconciliation." Many scholars make the point that "atonement" means "at-one-ment". That is the essence of reconciliation. Sin, an offense against a holy and righteous God, has caused estrangement, a separation. This would have been permanent had it not been for the atonement effected at the Cross.

Gerry

[BibleShockers]

"Atonement" is something that a perp does to express remorse and appeal to God for forgiveness. It does not describe the purpose of the death of Jesus as given in the Bible. The stated purpose of the death of Jesus in the writings of Paul is to justify God:

Ro 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his [God's] righteousness: that he [God] might be just[ified], and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

The Jewish law required animal blood atonements but the new covenant does not require any shedding of blood. The terms of the new covenenant are free forgiveness. Of course, the new covenant is only made with the houses of Israel and Judah, but justification by faith does not build on the law in any way and does not require the shedding of blood.

[Fausto]

Of course, the new covenant is only made with the houses of Israel and Judah, but justification by faith does not build on the law in any way and does not require the shedding of blood.

[Gerr]

"Atonement" is something that a perp does to express remorse and appeal to God for forgiveness. It does not describe the purpose of the death of Jesus as given in the Bible. The stated purpose of the death of Jesus in the writings of Paul is to justify God:

Ro 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his [God's] righteousness: that he [God] might be just[ified], and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

The Jewish law required animal blood atonements but the new covenant does not require any shedding of blood.

The new covenant does not require the blood of animals, but it did require the blood of our Lord to ratify it. Of the cup at the last supper which was symbolic of His blood He said:

"Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." Mt 26:27,28 ESV.

"This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me." 1 Cor 11:25 ESV.

The first covenant was not inaugurated without blood, Heb 9:18, neither did the services of the new covenant.

"But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come....he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption." Heb 9:11,12 ESV

Quote:

The terms of the new covenenant are free forgiveness.

The promised blessings are: 1) God will be the God of the covenant people and the covenant people will be His people, 2) a knowledge of God, 3) forgiveness, Heb 8:10-12.

The terms/conditions are: God's laws written in the heart and mind, Heb 8:10.

Quote:

Of course, the new covenant is only made with the houses of Israel and Judah,

If the new covenant was made only with literal Israel & Judah, then unless you are an Israelite or a Jew, you and I are hopeless. But the Good News is:

"And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise." Gal 3:29 ESV.

"For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit...." Rom 2:28,29 ESV.

Quote:

but justification by faith does not build on the law in any way and does not require the shedding of blood.

While I agree with you that justification by faith is not based on law but grace through faith, the whole purpose of justifying faith through grace is to bring rebellious & lawless people back to obedience that springs from faith, Rom 1:5; 16:26. See my comments and references above regarding the blood.

Gerry

[BibleShockers]

>>>...If the new covenant was made only with literal Israel & Judah, then unless you are an Israelite or a Jew, you and I are hopeless...

The new covenant is explicitly said to be with the houses of Israel and Judah - the northern and southern kingdoms:

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Heb 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Paul never appeals to the new covenant on behalf of gentiles. He only refers to it in connection with the conversion of Jews after the full number of gentiles comes into God's flock. It is also referred to with the 12 in the context of the passover, and Hebrews mentions it with his Jewish audience. It is not relevant to gentiles.

And gentile believers are not sons of Abraham until they believe, so you can't appeal to Paul's "in Christ" message, either.

According to Paul, the gentiles are justified by faith, with the faith that Abraham had while yet uncircumcised, so there is no need to appeal to a covenant with Israel and Judah.

>>>...the whole purpose of justifying faith through grace is to bring rebellious & lawless people back to obedience that springs from faith, Rom 1:5; 16:26.

Not "back" but "forward." Not "back" to the law, but forward to the "breath."

Ga 4:9 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?

Ga 4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

Ga 4:25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

Ga 5:1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

Heb 2:15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

Bill Ross

[Gerr]

>>>...If the new covenant was made only with literal Israel & Judah, then unless you are an Israelite or a Jew, you and I are hopeless...

The new covenant is explicitly said to be with the houses of Israel and Judah - the northern and southern kingdoms:

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Heb 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Paul never appeals to the new covenant on behalf of gentiles. He only refers to it in connection with the conversion of Jews after the full number of gentiles comes into God's flock. It is also referred to with the 12 in the context of the passover, and Hebrews mentions it with his Jewish audience. It is not relevant to gentiles.

And gentile believers are not sons of Abraham until they believe, so you can't appeal to Paul's "in Christ" message, either.

According to Paul, the gentiles are justified by faith, with the faith that Abraham had while yet uncircumcised, so there is no need to appeal to a covenant with Israel and Judah.

>>>...the whole purpose of justifying faith through grace is to bring rebellious & lawless people back to obedience that springs from faith, Rom 1:5; 16:26.

Not "back" but "forward." Not "back" to the law, but forward to the "breath."

Ga 4:9 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?

Ga 4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

Ga 4:25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

Ga 5:1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

Heb 2:15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

Bill Ross

So, are you saying Gentile believers are not bound by the terms of the covenant and are therefore free to steal, fornicate, murder, bow down to idols, etc.?

And who is in bondage to the law? The law-breaker or the law-keeper?

Gerry

[BibleShockers]

>>>o, are you saying Gentile believers are not bound by the terms of the covenant and are therefore free to steal, fornicate, murder, bow down to idols, etc.?

This may be the crux of the misunderstanding that motivates good people to be appalled by the idea of not being bound to the law... the idea that you only have two choices - the idea that if you are not under the law (Torah) then you are unrestrained and unaccountable. I can sympathize in why such a thought would evoke a visceral revulsion. If the only alternative to law is antinomianism, then you will naturally cling to the law.

But Paul, in his sometimes complex writings, addresses this. He argues that not only is there an alternative way to be righteous, but also that the law approach is a doomed approach - not because the law is flawed, but because men are under the control of sin.

I won't go into his dogmas right now, but I just want to warm up to the idea that there is a third option - other than law and other than antinomianism. For Paul, that which the law could not accomplish is accomplished by the divine breath.

I'll just point to one verse right now:

Ga 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness [righteous behavior] come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

So can you see how Paul is, like yourselves, shooting for righteous behavior... but he insists that if it were possible to get there from law observance, then Jesus didn't have to die.

More later.

Bill

[Gerr]

>>>o, are you saying Gentile believers are not bound by the terms of the covenant and are therefore free to steal, fornicate, murder, bow down to idols, etc.?

This may be the crux of the misunderstanding that motivates good people to be appalled by the idea of not being bound to the law... the idea that you only have two choices - the idea that if you are not under the law (Torah) then you are unrestrained and unaccountable. I can sympathize in why such a thought would evoke a visceral revulsion. If the only alternative to law is antinomianism, then you will naturally cling to the law.

But Paul, in his sometimes complex writings, addresses this. He argues that not only is there an alternative way to be righteous, but also that the law approach is a doomed approach - not because the law is flawed, but because men are under the control of sin.

I won't go into his dogmas right now, but I just want to warm up to the idea that there is a third option - other than law and other than antinomianism. For Paul, that which the law could not accomplish is accomplished by the divine breath.

I'll just point to one verse right now:

Ga 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness [righteous behavior] come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

So can you see how Paul is, like yourselves, shooting for righteous behavior... but he insists that if it were possible to get there from law observance, then Jesus didn't have to die.

More later.

Bill

The other option is: We love Him because He first loved us.

Jesus: If you love me, you will keep my commandments Jn 14:15 ESV.

Paul: Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. Rom 13:10 ESV.

Gerry

[BibleShockers]

>>>The other option is: We love Him because He first loved us.

Jesus: If you love me, you will keep my commandments Jn 14:15 ESV.

Fine. But is the Torah the commandments of Jesus? No. You would be closer to the meaning of John 14:15 if you were to get on board with Matthew 5-7.

>>>Paul: Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. Rom 13:10 ESV.

To appeal to Paul for support fot the idea of Christian law observance is absurd. Clearly Paul saw the law as antithetical to Christianity!

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>The other option is: We love Him because He first loved us.

Jesus: If you love me, you will keep my commandments Jn 14:15 ESV.

I believe that you presume that the Torah contains the commandments of Jesus?

>>>Paul: Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. Rom 13:10 ESV.

Paul is speaking about civil obligation (note the context about authorities, paying taxes). He is not speaking of obligation toward God:

Rom 13:8 Owe no **man** any thing, but to love **one another**: for he that **loveth another** hath fulfilled the law.

But he says to not accept any obligation toward anyone other than that:

Romans 13:8 **Owe no man any thing, but** to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.

You are prooftexting - taking a passage out of context and considering it "trump" over the explicit teaching of Scripture which is that the believer is not beholden to the Torah.

Ga 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit [breath], ye are not under the law.

Bill Ross

[John317]

>>>The other option is: We love Him because He first loved us.

Jesus: If you love me, you will keep my commandments Jn 14:15 ESV.

Fine. But is the Torah the commandments of Jesus? No. You would be closer to the meaning of John 14:15 if you were to get on board with Matthew 5-7.

>>>Paul: Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. Rom 13:10 ESV.

To appeal to Paul for support fot the idea of Christian law observance is absurd. Clearly Paul saw the law as antithetical to Christianity!

Bill Ross

Paul saw the moral law and God's grace as two sides of the same coin. Christ died to uphold God's law. The one could not exist without the other. It is law that drive us to Christ for salvation. The law shows us our sins. Without the law and recognition of our ourselves as sinners, there is no reason to go to Christ.

A true understanding of God's mercy and grace would never lead anyone to presume they can disobey God's law. God's law defines sin, and therefore, if you take away God's law, there is no sin.

Paul's question is, Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all. It's true faith that causes us to obey God.

See 1 Cor. 7: 19: What counts is not circumcision but keeping the commandments. But it is obedience that springs from faith. Rom. 1:5.

[John317]

>>>The other option is: We love Him because He first loved us.

Jesus: If you love me, you will keep my commandments Jn 14:15 ESV.

I believe that you presume that the Torah contains the commandments of Jesus?

Yes, Jesus upheld the Torah. He showed its spiritual nature, that the law has to do with the heart and not only with outward acts. It also has to do with the mind, the desires, etc. See the entire sermon on the mount at Matt. 5 through 8.

[BibleShockers]

>>>Paul saw the moral law and God's grace as two sides of the same coin.

What is the "moral law?"

>>>Christ died to uphold God's law.

Actually, Christ died to justify God for failing to uphold the law! God, as moral governor, is obligated to repay people for their offenses against others:

Ro 12:19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

(He is under no obligation to extract vengeance on offences against himself, though).

So if God is going to fail to pay what he owes, he needs a justification. That is the stated purpose of the death of Jesus:

Romans 3:

24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare [to his subjects] his righteousness for the remission [forgiveness] of sins that are past, through the forbearance [indulgence] of God;

26 To declare, I say, at this time his [God's] righteousness: that he [God] might be just[ified], and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

>>>The one could not exist without the other.

Are you talking about the law of Moses? Because that wasn't always around.

>>>It is law that drive us to Christ for salvation. The law shows us our sins.

What about Romans 2?

>>>Without the law and recognition of our ourselves as sinners, there is no reason to go to Christ.

What about conscience?

>>>A true understanding of God's mercy and grace would never lead anyone to presume they can disobey God's law.

You use the term "God's law" "God's moral law" ... I'm not sure what you are speaking of. We are discussing the law of Moses. Obviously, the law of Christ (ie: Matt 5-7), the law of faith, these are not the laws to whom the believer dies.

>>>God's law defines sin, and therefore, if you take away God's law, there is no sin.

Ro 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

>>Paul's question is, Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all. It's true faith that causes us to obey God.

The law of Moses remains un-repealed and unaltered. It is completely in tact - every last statute:

Mt 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

The law did not die, but the believer died to it. In fact, if a believer becomes circumcised, he falls from favor and is cursed in the obligation to keep every last one of its precepts:

Gal 5:

1 ¶ 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.

4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.

The law that Paul says is established is the law of faith:

Ro 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

Consider the illustration in the book of Esther. There was an unalterable law that was going to result in the Jews being destroyed, but the king could not rescind it. Instead, he passed a second law which resulted in their being saved:

Esther 8:

8 Write ye also for the Jews, as it liketh you, in the king’s name, and seal it with the king’s ring: for the writing which is written in the king’s name, and sealed with the king’s ring, may no man reverse.

9 Then were the king’s scribes called at that time in the third month, that is, the month Sivan, on the three and twentieth day thereof; and it was written according to all that Mordecai commanded unto the Jews, and to the lieutenants, and the deputies and rulers of the provinces which are from India unto Ethiopia, an hundred twenty and seven provinces, unto every province according to the writing thereof, and unto every people after their language, and to the Jews according to their writing, and according to their language.

10 And he wrote in the king Ahasuerus’ name, and sealed it with the king’s ring, and sent letters by posts on horseback, and riders on mules, camels, and young dromedaries:

11 Wherein the king granted the Jews which were in every city to gather themselves together, and to stand for their life, to destroy, to slay, and to cause to perish, all the power of the people and province that would assault them, both little ones and women, and to take the spoil of them for a prey,

12 Upon one day in all the provinces of king Ahasuerus, namely, upon the thirteenth day of the twelfth month, which is the month Adar.

13 The copy of the writing for a commandment to be given in every province was published unto all people, and that the Jews should be ready against that day to avenge themselves on their enemies.

14 So the posts that rode upon mules and camels went out, being hastened and pressed on by the king’s commandment. And the decree was given at Shushan the palace.

>>See 1 Cor. 7: 19: What counts is not circumcision but keeping the commandments. But it is obedience that springs from faith. Rom. 1:5.

Not the commands of Moses! Not obedience to the law of Moses! C'mon!

Paul passionately used so much ink to show the believer is not under the jurisdiction of the Torah. How can you not see that?

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>Yes, Jesus upheld the Torah. He showed its spiritual nature, that the law has to do with the heart and not only with outward acts. It also has to do with the mind, the desires, etc. See the entire sermon on the mount at Matt. 5 through 8.

The "Sermon on the Mount" is not the Torah. Jesus was speaking on his own authority in contrast to "them of the past":

Matthew 5:

27 ¶ Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time [ie: Moses], Thou shalt not commit adultery:

28 ***But I say*** unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

31 ***It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement*** [by Moses]:

32 ***But I say*** unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Matt 7:

28 And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine:

29 For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.

Jesus was not expounding Torah but rather giving a new Torah.

Bill Ross

[John317]

>>>Yes, Jesus upheld the Torah. He showed its spiritual nature, that the law has to do with the heart and not only with outward acts. It also has to do with the mind, the desires, etc. See the entire sermon on the mount at Matt. 5 through 8.

Quote:

Bill Ross-- The "Sermon on the Mount" is not the Torah.

This is true. But Jesus upheld the Torah. He gave the true meaning of the Torah. It was Jesus Christ who gave the law to Moses and inspired him to write the Torah, and then when He came as a man, Jesus told us what the Torah means. It was because of who He is/was, that He could say things like, "Moses said such and such, or you have read such and such. However, I-- I am saying....---"

But if we read carefully, this "other" that Jesus spoke was the true intent and objective of the Torah.

[BibleShockers]

>>>This is true. But Jesus upheld the Torah. He gave the true meaning of the Torah.

Are we told anywhere that Jesus gave the true meaning of the Torah?

Is this the true meaning?:

Mt 19:8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

>>>It was Jesus Christ who gave the law to Moses and inspired him to write the Torah,

Jesus says in the Sermon... "But I say" not "I said that but I meant this!"

To your mind, Jesus is Yehovah? Moses saw Jesus' face? What face did he have if he was without a human body?

Ex 33:11 And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.

Nu 14:14 And they will tell it to the inhabitants of this land: for they have heard that thou LORD art among this people, that thou LORD art seen face to face, and that thy cloud standeth over them, and that thou goest before them, by day time in a pillar of a cloud, and in a pillar of fire by night.

De 5:4 The LORD talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire,

De 34:10 And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face,

>>>and then when He came as a man, Jesus told us what the Torah means.

So "thou shalt not murder" really means all of this?;

21 ¶ Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

23 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee;

24 Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.

25 Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison.

26 Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.

What, pray tell, imaginitive thing does it mean to be "dead to the law?" If one is still married to it, then they are not free to marry another!

Bill Ross

[John317]

>>>This is true. But Jesus upheld the Torah. He gave the true meaning of the Torah.

Quote:

Bill Ross-- Are we told anywhere that Jesus gave the true meaning of the Torah?

Is this the true meaning?:

Mt 19:8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

I don't think Jesus gave the false meaning of the Torah.

Yes, I really do believe that that is the true meaning of the Torah. God is willing to accept us where we are and work with us to bring us up higher. He sometimes "winks" at humanity's ignorance and sins, but now is calling all of us to repentance and full faith.

That is the true meaning of Torah. The true meaning is love for God and love for our fellow man. Another true meaning is that the Messiah would one day come and put an end to animal sacrifices and, ultimately, to death itself. The prophets of the Old Testament did not contradict Torah, either, and they spoke of all this. God simply could not give all truth to a people that had just come out of generations of slavery in Egypt.

[BibleShockers]

What did Paul mean about being "dead to the law" and "free from the law" and "not under the law"?

Bill

[Gerr]

>>>The other option is: We love Him because He first loved us.

Jesus: If you love me, you will keep my commandments Jn 14:15 ESV.

Fine. But is the Torah the commandments of Jesus? No. You would be closer to the meaning of John 14:15 if you were to get on board with Matthew 5-7.

>>>Paul: Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. Rom 13:10 ESV.

To appeal to Paul for support fot the idea of Christian law observance is absurd. Clearly Paul saw the law as antithetical to Christianity!

Bill Ross

It is more absurd to think that because Paul is against obedience to law as a way of earning one's way into heaven that he is therefore against obedience to law. Nothing could be farther than the truth!!! That same Paul whom you claim saw the law "as antithetical to Christianity" had this to say:

[color:red]"Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law....Love does no wrong to a neighbor, therefore love is the fulfilling of the law." Rom 13:8,10 ESV.

What law was he talking about? He makes it clear when he says:

"The commandments, 'You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,' and any other commandments are summed up in this word: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' Rom 13:9 ESV.

Again, the same Paul says:

"Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for muderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine...." 1 Tim 1:8-10 ESV

How can/does one misuse the law? The most egregious one is of course using the law as a way to gain entrance into heaven. He clearly points out that the law is not laid down for loving, obedient people but for the lawless, the disobedient, etc. etc. So when even a believer willfully does something evil, the long arm of the law reaches even to him because believers cannot continue to live in sin just because they are under grace, Rom 6:1,2. Grace was extended to sinners "to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of His name among all the nations..." Rom 1:5 ESV.

Gerry

[BibleShockers]

>>>...So when even a believer willfully does something evil,

Would not observing the Sabbath, dietary, sacrifice or festival statues of Torah be "something evil?"

>>>the long arm of the law reaches even to him because believers cannot continue to live in sin just because they are under grace, Rom 6:1,2....

So in what sense is the curse (the law) broken?:

Ga 3:10 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.

Are not believers still under the curse that is the law then if to violate it brings its curses?

>>>Grace was extended to sinners "to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of His name among all the nations..." Rom 1:5 ESV.

Ac 6:7 And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were ***obedient to the faith***.

Have you died to the law in order to be married to another? Or are you still married?

Bill Ross

[Gerr]

>>>The other option is: We love Him because He first loved us.

Jesus: If you love me, you will keep my commandments Jn 14:15 ESV.

Fine. But is the Torah the commandments of Jesus? No. You would be closer to the meaning of John 14:15 if you were to get on board with Matthew 5-7.

Bill Ross

I believe you have a misunderstanding about the Sermon on the Mt. Jesus said:

[color:red]"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill [Gk pleroo - to make full, fill to the full, to complete, to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be - Enhanced Strong's Lexicon] them." Mt 5:17 ESV.

Jesus did not only carry out what the law demanded, He also came to "magnify His law and make it glorious," Isa 42:21 ESV, to teach and show the full meaning of the law. That is what the Sermon on the Mt is - the law magnified and made glorious.

Gerry

[Gerr]

>>>...So when even a believer willfully does something evil,

Would not observing the Sabbath, dietary, sacrifice or festival statues of Torah be "something evil?"

Let me ask you: Is it evil to willfully disobey the first commandment? i.e. "You shall have no other gods before me." The second? i.e. "You shall not make for yourself a carved image...You shall not bow down to them..." How about the third? i.e. "You shall not take the name of LORD your God in vain..." How about the fifth? i.e. "Honor your father and your mother." How about the 7th? "You shall not commit adultery."

If it is evil to break 9 of the 10, what makes you think breaking the 4th is excempted and not evil?

Was it evil for Adam & Eve to disregard what God said not to eat?

As for the shadowy/typical aspects of the law that pointed to the sacrificial work of Christ, yes, they ended at the Cross.

Quote:

>>>the long arm of the law reaches even to him because believers cannot continue to live in sin just because they are under grace, Rom 6:1,2....

So in what sense is the curse (the law) broken?:

Ga 3:10 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.

Are not believers still under the curse that is the law then if to violate it brings its curses?

No doubt you have heard this illustration. It's an old one, but it will serve the purpose nonetheless. You are caught speeding or driving recklessly. You are hauled to court. You are found guilty. To keep you out of jail, here are your options. 1) The judge dismisses the charges and puts you on probation, 2) You or someone pays a fine. You walk out of the courtroom. What would happen if you drive recklessly again?

Quote:

>>>Grace was extended to sinners "to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of His name among all the nations..." Rom 1:5 ESV.

Ac 6:7 And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were ***obedient to the faith***.

Here is what the Bible says about Abraham whom Paul cites in Rom 4 as a paragon of faith: [color:red]"...Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws." Gen 26:5 ESV.

Quote:

Have you died to the law in order to be married to another? Or are you still married?

Bill Ross

How is one released from the law? [color:red]"Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear FRUIT for God." Rom 7:4 ESV. "I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not nullify the grace of God, for if justification were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose." Gal 2:20,21 ESV. "What then? Are we to sin (transgressing the law) because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness." Rom 6:15-18 ESV.

The law cannot lay claim on a person who is dead!!! Dead people cannot go on worshiping idols. Dead people cannot keep on fornicating or murdering!!!

Here is what seems to be a paradox which a lot of antinomian Christians cannot seem to understand: Obedience to the law is liberty (that's why the Apostle James calls it "the law of liberty"); disobedience is slavery - slavery to sin, NOT slavery to the law!

Gerry

[BibleShockers]

>>>I believe you have a misunderstanding about the Sermon on the Mt. Jesus said:

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill [Gk pleroo - to make full, fill to the full, to complete, to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be - Enhanced Strong's Lexicon] them." Mt 5:17 ESV.

A Lexicon offered all that foolishness? I mean, PLEROO is a Greek word, not a religious word, and it decidedly does not mean "to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be!" Am I supposed to say, "Oh, if that's what the word means, then of course..."? I loathe it when the "authorities" are "on the take." You should burn that book immediately as it is clearly rubbish.

Now the question is, did Jesus:

* abolish the Torah (No.)

* explain "the Real Meaning of Christmas and the Torah"? (No.)

* add to the Torah (No.)

* give a new Torah (Yes,)

>>>Jesus did not only carry out what the law demanded, He also came to "magnify His law and make it glorious," Isa 42:21 ESV, to teach and show the full meaning of the law. That is what the Sermon on the Mt is - the law magnified and made glorious.

NO:

Ps 89:34 My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.

Jesus did not have the authority to change a ratified covenant between God and the Jews:

Ga 3:15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man’s covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.

Da 6:8 Now, O king, establish the decree, and sign the writing, that it be not changed, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which altereth not.

He came to establish a new covenant that was so glorioius that it made the glory of the first covenant to disappear:

2Co 3:10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.

Bill Ross