Quote:
Originally Posted by SemperFideles  I thought I described the 3rd use fairly clearly through a number of analogies. Are my descriptions confusing? |
I am losing the spcific meaning at times with analogies
Quote:
Originally Posted by SemperFideles Why was the mountain where God gave the Law to Moses so threatening to the people? God's Holy presence was there but why would that seem like utter death to the people in the wilderness? Well, for one thing, Hebrews 3-4 note that these were stiff-necked and rebellious and were mostly unbelievers. The Law is an expression of God's Holiness and, to the flesh, it is fearful, frightening, and condemning. When we finally have eyes to see it, the Law kills us in our "flesh" and causes us to fall down at Christ's feet for deliverance. |
I agree. This example is the first 2 uses of Law right? Point out sin then point us to Christ.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SemperFideles I said this earlier, the only thing the Law can do to the unregenerate is terrify them or judge them for their sin. The only thing the unregenerate can do with the Law is ask for the minimal boundaries that they believe they can stay within and still be considered obedient. They're not looking beyond the Law to a desire for God but merely looking at it as if it is a slavemaster or something to restrict them. |
First use right? Condemn, point out sin. Yet the unregenerate are still commanded to obey Law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SemperFideles
The redeemed individual, however, understands that Christ has fulfilled all righteousness and removed their reproach and the condemnation of the Law. They have eyes to see now that the Law is not what they suspected it was when they were blind and dead. They don't see in it a minimal set of performance markers but as something that reflects the character of God who they love. It is pursued not for the "thou shall not" but for its end which is to guide us deeper into our understanding of the God we love for redeeming us.
I hope this helps. I keep trying to use different analogies. The important key to remember is that the Law is not really the thing that changes. It's us. This is why Paul can say on the one hand that the Law kills us and then say that the Law is just, holy, and good. He's really saying that the Law stays the same but the effect it has on the individual is based upon the disposition of the heart of the individual.
|
Yes I agree here to a point Rich. So when I hear of this 3rd use of Law, that means it reveals the moral character of God to man? This is where I get confused. I thought Christ did that. Where the fullness of God dwells. I know we cannot turn grace into a lisence to sin, I hope noone here thinks I am espousing that. And think that because Christ fulfilled it i am now at liberty to break it willfully. Just becasue Christ fed the poor does not mean I am also not called to do that.. Where I think I am missing is the 3rd use seems to be telling me to affix a Mezuzah on each doorpost in our homes. every time I enter or leave, the mezuzah reminds me that I have a covenant with God. Not physically perhaps, but spiritually in my mind. Then i wonder, do I need to be reminded daily of what is right or wrong and can the Law do this for me or is it even designed for this purpose for the gentile? Acts 15 would have been a perfect point to exaplin this, yet it does the opposite:
5Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses."
6The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: "Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith.
10Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? 11No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are."
23With them they sent the following letter: The apostles and elders, your brothers, To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia: Greetings. 24We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. 25So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— 26men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. 28It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements:
29You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell.
This seems to be it for the gentile believers. And we know this is not only about salvation, but how they should live according to the rules set forth. I just think it would have been a perfect time for Luke to say the 10 words are to be your rule of life. AS the pharisse believers wanted the Law of moses to be upheld completely. Yet they did not agree with them. I ask why not?
Look, guys, like I said earlier, I am probably wrong. To think I am against a great witness in questioning the 3rd use is nothing I take lightly.