Comments on: ETS 2008 – Jim Congdon “Believers’ Relation to the Law: Not Obligation, but Fulfillment”

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 04:31:31 +0000

I can agree with that. I think, unfortunately, that when most people think of believers being free from the law, that means we now have license to do what we want because no matter what, God sees us a righteous. If walking in the Spirit means that we are actually now living to an even higher standard than the law would require, I don't think I have a problem with that.
My reference to God being outside of time was in reference to the fact that just because the law has “changed” doesn't mean that God's standard has changed. I view God's revelation to man as a father would raise a child. Natural law would be similar to how a baby responds to his environment…he is just wired a certain way to do certain things. The law given to Israel is like how one would raise a pre teen/teen ager…”do this, don't do that. Why? Because Dad says so!” The new covenant in Christ is how a parent hopes his adult child will make decisions for the rest of his life. Jesus says follow me. A father says, “I have shown you the standards by which you should live. No go and make good choices.” There is a freedom in this, but a tremendous responsibility.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 16:16:06 +0000

I sort of agree, but I think the law is too low of a standard for righteousness. God's holiness is the standard for us. Grace doesn't lead us to meaure up to the law but to God's holiness. The law of God was the 'gold standard' in earlier redemptive history but has now been superseded. I guess I would say that we fullfill the law, but not through acts of intention but as a cosequence of living by the spirit of grace. Much in the way a high jumper who cleared a 7 foot bar consequentially clears all lower heights in that same jump.
We are no longer under the law. True, God is outside our timeline but his laws are within them. I believe the law is obsolete at our time in God's heilgeschichte. God's demands are no longer those codified in the Tanakh but in his very persona.
God's laws are explicit provisional demands on mankind, not explicit revelations of his eternal holiness, which has now become the 'gold standard' on account of the spirit of grace working within us.
Why fiddle faddle with the obsolete?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 14:13:55 +0000

Why do you suppose that the believer's responsibility to the law is out of sync with the spirit of grace? Are you suggesting that the law and grace are mutually exclusive? Or are you saying that we simply have a difficult time understanding how the two go together? It seems like we are always trying to compartmenatlize things which creates an either/or false dichotomy. ie. Law or Grace, Old Covenant or New Covenant, etc. Why can't it be both/and? Why can't we walk in grace thereby fulfilling the law? How are we fulfulling the OC by walking in the NC? Reading the New Testament should illuminate the Old Testament and the OT should help us truly understand the NT. We think in linear terms…the new makes the old obsolete. God isn't linear. God is eternal and we keep trying to put him into our timelines. God entered the timeline in Jesus but that doesn't make God change; It changes us. The cosmos were a womb for humanity. Through the course of salvation history, Israel became a new womb for the purpose of a new humanity; a new creation (palingenesia).

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 05:21:44 +0000

I pretty much agree with your post. My point is more directed at the believers responsibility to the law, which I think is out of sync with the spirit of grace. Divinely revealed laws of all categories are good only for a certain time and place. I make a hard distinction between the nature of God and his revealed laws to man which are provisional on account of the vicissitudes of man.
Therefore I think appealing to any revealed divine law as a present guide for righteous living today is potenially regressive. Slavery was not condemned but accepted as a social reality that needn't be challenged. It made God's top ten list but wasn't demonized. Yipes! Our Southern ancestors looked to scripture and found warrant for slavery. I think our grey brothers confused the eternal holiness of God with his provisional laws said or did not say in the decalogue. Today, slavery is anathema even to the atheist. Most of mankind has socially progressed past the ancient commandments which provisionally spoke to men when and where they lived.
The law, all of it, however theologically categorized, is no longer needed. Moses is persona non grata.
Outwardly I may appear as an antinomian, but inwardly I'm living by that very Spirit who gave those outwardly revealed laws which were only applicable to certain men at certain times.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 03:52:44 +0000

I don't completely understand what the argument is here. Are we trying to figure out whether or not there is to be a distinction between moral, ceremonial and civil law? Or are we looking at the believer's responsibility to the law? Or is there something else I am missing?
Regardless, I believe we must keep in mind that God hasn't changed…He can't change by His very nature. Therefore, the requirements of God haven't changed for us. God is love, and as a result, He invites us to return that love to Him…freely, faithfully, fully and fruitfully. This love isn't to be abstract, especially since the Incarnation. Is it possible that God's love has been revealed in different ways? Giving Adam and Eve the command to “not eat of the fruit” was an act of love. The 10 commandments were another act of love. All of the ceremonial laws were an act of love similar to an intervention…God says to Abraham, “so you want to have a child of the flesh with an Egyptian? Then you are going to circumcise the child when he is 13 just like the Egyptians do and circumcision is going to be a constant reminder that only obedience through the spirit is acceptable.” He also says to Israel, “so you want to worship cows and goats and eat the pig like the Egyptians? Then here is what you are going to do: kill the cows and stay away from the pork.” The ceremonial law wasn't necessarily different from the moral…it was a reminder of what not to do and how to stay away from it. That is why God always told Israel to wipe out the gentile nations.
In Christ, there is no need for the reminders because the reminders were always there to point us to something else. That something else is Christ. Before Christ, the law was like a road map. Now that Christ has come, it is like having the destination in the car with you. No need for a map anymore. Christ is the law. Follow Christ, then you follow the law. The beauty is that he even gives us the grace we need to follow him. The goal has always been, as Christian so eloquently stated, “Love God and man and remember to put the seat back down.”

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:45:56 +0000

My reply is more of a general remark than a particular one. I believe the law of God given on Mt. Sinai is provisional. It reveals the unchanging righteousness of God in the ever changing ethos of human existence. The 10 commandments are a chronos -conditioned incursion of God's everlasting righteousness. It spoke directly to moral and ethical matters than were relevent at that time such as idol worship, coveting slaves etc. Some of the commandments are no longer relevant in our time. God's righteousness remains unchanged but the contermporary incursion of that holiness manifested by law does change. Thats the beauty of Christ commandments. They're grounded in the eternal righteousness of God yet express themselves in the ever changing fluidity of human existence. Yippee. Blessings.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 17:29:32 +0000

I think Romans 1 & 2 clearly teaches that the law is written on all people's hearts and “their conscience also bears witness.”
Which law?
However, this is an impractical hypothetical.
Nice try, can't squirm out of it that easy.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 15:25:14 +0000

Christian,
Remember that when Jesus responded “Love God and your neighbor” he said that those 2 commands were always represented by the Law in the OT. They were the summary of the Law. So again, the point is not that Jesus gave us a brand new law and chucked the old one. But you're quite right that we no longer have to obey the many civil and ceremonial laws that were given to the Jews, because those were always meant to be temporary and provisional. But, as far as I can tell, no one here is disagreeing with you on that. The only current debate seems to be whether or not there is something unique about the 10 Commandments, and what that uniqueness might imply. So I'm curious who exactly you are responding to with your comment?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 04:14:08 +0000

Before we get to the question of law keeping I think we should first establish which laws are ' on the books'.
Is it the 10 or the 613 commandments? What about the Mishnah, the oral torah. What about the laws handed down by the Church through the years? Granted, the Misnah and the Ecclesiatical laws may be supergogatory or they may be the dictums of the elders sitting in the seat of Moses. You never know! You reply “just the written stuff baby!” Ok, but be aware that many attempts to apply the law of God contemporaneously will result in its alteration through both amplification and conflation. Let's not talk about those 'Blue book' laws of the Bible that have been abrogated. Maybe some other time. At any rate the written text doesn't always hit the mark. When there is no explicit command against this or that moral and ethical dilemma should we then adjust the law accordingly? Or do we remain silent becasue the text we cling to is silent? Is God then silent? It would seem to me that the law of God would have to evolve in order to remain relevant to a socially evolving humanity. Too much hassle if you ask me.
The simple Nazerene was asked a question about the law and basically factored it down to just 2. Love God and people. Works for me. Thank God. because I do love my bacon and eggs made on Saturday morning.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 19:48:50 +0000

Aaron, that would appear to be Moses' purpose in going up to the mountain. And he did declare to them the word of the Lord later. But it is very, very clear that God spoke directly to the people, not through Moses when He gave the 10 Commandments.
These words the Lord spoke to all your assembly at the mountain out of the midst of the fire, the cloud, and the thick darkness, with a loud voice