Originally posted by NorrinRadd
View Post
I'm not sure what you mean by "hierarchical" in this context.
In any case, even if the differences are not numerous, the ones that do exist are not trivial.
But that does not seem to be what the context of Gal. 3 is saying.
The pedagogue-slave does not (explicitly, at least) "teach us what is holy and what isn't," it taught *something* -- to Israel, not us -- until Jesus came.
So, yes. The pedagogue taught the young children right from wrong, what is acceptable and not, and led them from infanthood to adulthood. Paul's metaphor here was used to show the Galatians that the Torah was used to take the people of God from the promise of Abraham to the fulfillment of that promise in Christ. It showed, like the pedagogue, what God considered right and wrong.
Those under Law were slaves and prisoners, and the Law itself was a special kind of slave. Some were never under it, and no one in Christ is under it.
This, IMO, is begging the question.
Does the Law really, in all its hundreds of details, "define what God considers sin"?
Or is "what God considers sin" much more simple -- e.g. refusal to believe in Him, and/or failure to treat others as we wish to be treated?
I don't believe that does justice to what He said. In fact, the details of the Torah are very "life-applicable." But He said that "Treat others as you wish to be treated" sums up all of it.
Now, pretty damn clearly, it does NOT. There are many details that do not fall into that category in any recognizable way.
But again, IMO the context suggests otherwise. Look at vv. 10-12. The specific sins listed are *all* acts that involve treating others badly -- ill-gotten treasures, cheating with false scales and measures, violence, lying. All are fairly obvious violations of "Love your neighbor as yourself" or Treat others as you wish to be treated" or, in the immediate context, acting with justice, lovingkindness, and humility.
So, ask yourself... under your understanding of the NT, why is idolatry sinful?
No one is suggesting He "conform His justice to our sin," so this is a red herring.
I'm not sure what relevance your comments even have to what I actually said, unless *maybe* along these lines: You may be thinking that they are two totally distinct Commandments, and that "Love your neighbor as yourself" or "Treat others as you wish to be treated" covers a bunch of stuff, and then every jot and tittle of the hundreds of detailed regulations are included in "Love the LORD your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength." I do not see them so. I see one Commandment that is two-fold: We love God, and therefore we treat others with love. The wording of Luke suggests the two are one compound Commandment. The wording of Matthew 22 in Greek says the second is "the same as" the first. Paul says that the single Commandment to "Love your neighbor as yourself" fulfills the whole law. James says that following that Commandment is "doing well" or "doing right."
Again, I see this as a red herring and begging the question. I am not starting with *my* "plumb line," I am seeking to find God's actual standard obscured in clashing Scriptures.
See above.
We often hear this, but the context seems to be that it brought to Christ those who once were *under* that Covenant, i.e. Jews.
Maybe. Can you support this?
Romans 3:20, "Therefore no one will be declared righteous in His sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin."
John 16:7*But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the [c]Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you. 8*And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment;
- Both the Father (Hebrews 12:5-9) and Jesus (Revelation 3:19) convict us of sin and the Holy Spirit is a witness for both of them (John 15:26).
- The scriptures themselves convict us of sin (Hebrews 4:12-13) and the Holy Spirit teaches us the Word of God (John 14:26).
- The human conscience is where conviction of sin takes place (John 8:9; Romans 2:15; etc.) and the Holy Spirit speaks to man through his conscience (Romans 9:1; I John 2:20); therefore, when man needs to repent, conviction of the Holy Spirit takes place
In my Word-Faith days, I was taught that "the curse of the Law" was found in Deut. 28, based at least partly on the idea that Gal. 3:10 clearly alludes to Deut. 27 and a bit of Deut. 29. So, supposedly, believers were "redeemed" from all those curses, and only the blessings remained. Since then, I've moved on. I'm sufficiently satisfied that Fee is correct, and that "redeemed from the curse of the Law" means redeemed from living under the Law, and the concomitant necessity to flawlessly perform every little bit of it.
And anyway, the Eph. and Col. passages are sufficiently clear in teaching that every bit of the old Law has been removed.
I agree that Paul teaches (Gal. 3:21) that the Law cannot impart life. However, assuming that when the rabbi says "the one safe path is impossible for us to stay on," he means "it is impossible to perfectly follow the Law," I believe Paul disagrees (Phil. 3:6).
See above.
Red herring and begging the question. What I am "demanding" is a clear and concise answer as to why Jesus said "Treat others as you wish to be treated" sums up the Law and Prophets if it really does not.
So, we see that the whole Law being summed up depends on what subject is being addressed. If duty to fellow man is being stressed, the sum of the Torah and Prophets is "love each other." If duty to God is stressed in the context being discussed, both loving God and loving each other is the sum. But, again, loving each other flows out of loving God, and we can't say we love God if we continue in sin.
Why? What makes written Torah commandments deadly, but not others?
But look at the whole context of James 2. As I noted previously, he, like Paul, emphasizes "Love your neighbor as yourself." When he cites examples of breaking Commandments, he explicitly cites those that involve wronging another person. All the positive exhortations he gives of "works" that demonstrate genuine faith are deeds of kindness and mercy and equanimity. He never says, "Oh, and don't do gay stuff."
Come on now, it's my private interpretation of QUITE A FEW "particular verses."
I would venture to say that there are more "particular verses" suggesting the removal of all laws and Commandments except "Love your neighbor as yourself" than there are condemning homosexual practice as law-breaking.
Comment