To abolish or not to abolish

You say it is not the case that you believe you are with out a sin nature. If so you must have an answer yourself to the selected verse from John’s first letter for it certainly appears that those born of God do not sin. Isaiah 64:6 says, “All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away.” Psalm 14:3 is quoted in Romans 3, “All have turned aside, they have together become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one.” None are born of God then?
I see born of God meaning adopted sons; chosen before all creation and written in the book of life. We are made acceptable by Jesus which covers up all our sins. We can then be held blameless when the Lord’s Kingdom comes. I think inspired Scripture often has an infinite time frame. Being born of God, I will, have been, and always will be seen as someone who suffered the curse yet was sinless because of my faith in the sanctification of Jesus Christ. I’d be interested how you interpret it.

I found a website called “servants of Yahweh” a month back while digging up info on the council of Nicea. I just finished reading an article from the site where it claimed that Paul, especially in his later ministry turned from God and began to preach his own ministry. His main argument was based on Paul being a heretic for saying we must abolish the Law. He cited OT verses (Malaci 4:4,5) that stated when the end times come the Israelites will all follow the law and be reunited. He stated that there was no prophecy of the Law being abolished. He quoted from Jeremiah but must have skipped 31:31 where it says a new covenant will be established. Never the less, it’s no surprise that Paul’s ministry struck such controversy in the book of Acts following up to today.

For me the strongest scriptural weight for the importance of the Law rests in Jesus words via Mathew and Luke,

Mt 5:17,18 - "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Lu 16:17 - It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.

I think it’s important to understand what Paul means when he talks about the “Law”. (This is not saying that I know exactly. Just because I quote Scripture now only means I’ve learned how to use a concordance.) In Ephesians 2 he states, “14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, 16 and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17 He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.”

This new man is the Christian: Jew and Gentile. What Law, what hostility is abolished? I understand it to be the law against associating with Gentiles. The Israelites were meant to be priests to the Gentiles but while being groomed for this position God did not want them associating with Gentiles for they would be turned away; not that they weren’t turned away anyway. By Jesus time that no longer seems to be an issue. The laws against Gentiles are to be disregarded. I say disregarded because I see no way around the fact that Jesus’ and Paul’s use of the word abolish, in regard to the law, are contradictory.

Is Jesus saying we should still stone our kids when they disobey or force the man who raped our daughters to marry her? I hope not. I think he’s just explaining that he has come to expand on the Law but not abolish it. In the same way the spirit has been given to us to expand on the Law. So what is Paul talking about then when he says it will be abolished? In the first verse of Romans 7 he says that the law has authority over man only as long as he lives. When he dies in Christ he is raised into the life of the spirit. Paul is obviously talking about the death and resurrection of the spirit not the body. This is why he goes on to state the war that goes on within him. The resurrected spirit trapped in the sinful body. Christ renews the spirit now and offers us new bodies when our cursed one dies. Thus our spirit is free from the law yet our bodies are still subject to it.

I agree that “tandem” is not a sufficient description of how law/spirit works through us. Rather I would like to stand by chapter headings (law), and complete chapter (holy spirit) as a more sufficient analogy.

Please tell me what your definition of the Law is. I see it as what is written in the first five books of Moses and the traditions, customs and ordinances that came from it. As well I see it as rules that modern church fathers have applied universally which really only applies to those who are convicted of such rules for their life.

I should stop but I must comment on the following,

“I’m in a far far more dangerous place where I have been convicted of certain kingdom truths and your descriptions of the consciousness of the violations is more applicable to my state of affairs, if I were to go that way, rather than your run of the mill Christian who is pretty unaware of the spirit’s workings.”

If you could please expand and clarify this for me a bit. Is it dangerous because of the subjectivity of the leading of the Holy Spirit? What do you mean, if I were to go that way? I still wonder where your evidence is for your conclusions about the run of the mill Christians?

Thank you again for the conversation. It forces me to study scripture with great depth; sometimes leading to conflict and shame and other times to joy.