Help! - Gospel Clarification for Muslim

[VERITAS]

Help! I need a succinct explanation of the Gospel for a Muslim that I'm talking to online. He's presented me with a paper by Sheikh Ahmed Deedat that posits the false dichotomy that Paul had a different view of salvation than Christ. Specifically that Jesus said keep the commandments IN ORDER TO be saved while Paul said these were nailed to the cross and that salvation is through the death and resurrection of Jesus. My problem is this: I want to 1) show that the O.C. did hold out that salvation could be obtained by complete adherence/fidelity to the Law, 2) no man could keep the Law except the perfect Son of God, and 3) that our Salvation is obtained by Christ's obedience to the Law. I've got the verses I want to use. I just need to tie this all together with HOW God used/uses faith to justify the ungodly in a condensed manner. (The Muslim fella lives in France so the language barrier necessitates a simple, unadorned explanation.) And can it be said without going into the doctrine of double imputation right off the bat?

Help!!!
--Cheri

 

[Poimen]

Romans 2 & 3 is all you need.

Romans 2:13 "For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified."

and then

Romans 3:19-20 "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. 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."

remedy? vs. 21-28

 

[turmeric]

Go back to the story of Abraham sacrificing Isaac - some of your catechesis has been done for Muslims by the OT, just as for ancient Israel. "In the mountain of the Lord, it shall be provided"

So, because we cannot "do this and live" God has provided a substitute.

[Edited on 6-9-2005 by turmeric]

 

[VERITAS]

2 Different Ways

Meg, you hit the nail on the head BUT I'm afraid that he will say that obedience to the Law and faith in Christ are 2 different ways or means of salvation and I want to point out that they're not - that we are saved by Christ's obedience and that we appropriate (?) His Righteousness through faith - the vehicle (?) by which people were saved in both the OC and NC. I'm just stumped on how to phrase it succinctly...

"do this and live" vs "the just shall live by faith"

[Edited on 6-10-2005 by VERITAS]

 

[VERITAS]

Hey Daniel,

The dilemma that I'm faced with is his assertion that Christ and Paul proclaimed two different means of salvation - one through the law and one through faith. Specifically he states:

"Salvation only comes through keeping of the commandments (Matt 19:16-17)" - Christ's way

vs

"Paul nails the law and the commandments to the cross (Col 2:14) and claims that salvation can only be obtained through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Cor 15:14)."

I'm wanting to show that this was not the case. That the dichotomy between "do this and live" vs "the just shall live by faith" is a false dichotomy. I think the language of Rom 3:21 ("but NOW...") would play into his false assumptions.

So far the most concise explanation that I've run across is Matthew Henry's statement that "faith had precedence over the law". This is closer to how I was thinking of explaining it... The problem with the fella in Matt 19:16-22 was that he was trying to gain eternal life by works so Christ answers him with the Law ("do this and live") vs John 8:24 where Christ tells His fellow Jews that "unless you believe that I am He you will die in your sins" (i.e. "the just shall LIVE by faith").

We know that faith preceded the Law and that it was by faith alone that anyone was or is saved and we know that the law "was added" because of or for the transgressors (Gal 3:19) "UNTIL The Seed should come to Whom the promises were made" BUT neither do I want to leave out the necessary fact that we are saved by HIS obedience (Rom 5:10, 19; Heb 5:8-9; Gal 4:4).

Is there a more succinct or compelling way of stating this to unbelievers? That's my dilemma...