A question for "non-Professiona" Christians

[Hiroshi]

Now, I'm trying to figure out if my participation would be welcome or not?

Your participation would be most welcome.

Btw, I'm going away for the weekend in a few minutes, off into the countryside where nobody has computers or internet access. So I won't be able to send any more posts until Monday.

Talk some more later. Bye for now.

 

[PouringRain]

Hiroshi, sorry I have not yet replied to your question posed at me. I have had a reply (unwritten out) since last Friday morning, but I have been lacking in time to sit and write it. Then, these past two nights I have been ill. I will reply as soon as I am able, but I didn't want you to think I ran off. LOL

 

[Hiroshi]

Hiroshi, sorry I have not yet replied to your question posed at me. I have had a reply (unwritten out) since last Friday morning, but I have been lacking in time to sit and write it. Then, these past two nights I have been ill. I will reply as soon as I am able, but I didn't want you to think I ran off. LOL

No worries Rain, and no need to rush things. Just reply whenever you are able to. Sorry that you have been ill.

 

[PouringRain]

Let me say firstly that this is a most interesting subject to discuss with you and I am impressed with your knowledge and research. Also I think that you would like to say a lot more but want to be as short and to the point as possible.

Let me just again cite Galatians 3:10 where it says: "All who rely on observing the law are under a curse". Now do you think that it is a light matter for a person to bring himself under a curse from Almighty God?

Thank you for the kind words.

Galatians 3:10 does say that in isolation, and that is why it is important to put it in context of the surrounding verses and also to look at the origin of what the verse was based upon. Historical context is also of interest when we consider what I mentioned previously, that Galatians was written prior to Acts and in Acts we see Paul making timothy to be circumcised. You ask if it is something light for a person to bring himself under a curse-- I ask, do you think Paul would then force Timothy to be cursed? Not at all, because it is not the observance of the law that brings the curse it is reliance upon the law that brings the curse. This is where we must look at context (and also at the verse itself). Galatians 3:10 says that "all those who rely..." Rely is a keyword in that verse, especially in context of the rest of Galatians 3. The problem was not in following the law, but in relying on the law for salvation. The essence of Galatians 3 is that salvation is through faith, not through observance of the law, and if man relies on the law then he is also bound by those curses of the law, but the law is not against God and is beneficial. That could sum up the entire essence of Galatians 3.

The law itself is not the problem, it is reliance on the law for salvation that Paul is saying is the problem. So, what are these curses? We must then back up to where Galatians 3:10 (second half of verse) comes from to see the curses. Galatians 3:10b "for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them'." The origin: Deuteronomy 27:26 "‘Cursed is the one who does not confirm (all) the words of this law by observing them'," The version I have used here uses the word "all" in Deuteronomy, but it must be noted that in the original Hebrew the word all was not in there. It could be argued that it was implied. If you look at the previous verses in Deuteronomy then you can see where the curses were attached to:

Deut 27:15-26 Cursed is the one who makes a carved or molded image, an abomination to the LORD, the work of the hands of the craftsman, and sets it up in secret. And all the people shall answer and say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who treats his father or his mother with contempt. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who moves his neighbor’s landmark. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’
Cursed is the one who makes the blind to wander off the road. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’
Cursed is the one who perverts the justice due the stranger, the fatherless, and widow. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who lies with his father’s wife, because he has uncovered his father’s bed. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who lies with any kind of animal. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who lies with his sister, the daughter of his father or the daughter of his mother. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who lies with his mother-in-law. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who attacks his neighbor secretly. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who takes a bribe to slay an innocent person. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who does not confirm all the words of this law by observing them. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’”

Then Deuteronomy 28 gives us the blessings and the curses. (I won't list them here.) In Galatians, Paul was saying that if you rely on the law for your salvation, then you are also subject to the curses of the law for breaking it. But again, it does not mean that observing the law is bad nor wrong. One can observe the law without relying on the law for salvation. The curse of the law has been removed, but it does not mean that man now has free license to disobey the law.

To answer your question, no, it is not a light matter to bring a curse upon oneself from God. But following the law does not bring the curse. I think it is clear in Paul's own actions when he had Timothy circumcised in accordance with the law, that following it is not what brings the curse. It is the reliance on the law for salvation, rather than faith, that then subjects man to the law and all the curses that go along with breaking it. The law is not bad, and choosing to observe the law out of love for God will not bring disfavor with God.

 

[Hiroshi]

Thank you for the kind words.

Galatians 3:10 does say that in isolation, and that is why it is important to put it in context of the surrounding verses and also to look at the origin of what the verse was based upon. Historical context is also of interest when we consider what I mentioned previously, that Galatians was written prior to Acts and in Acts we see Paul making timothy to be circumcised. You ask if it is something light for a person to bring himself under a curse-- I ask, do you think Paul would then force Timothy to be cursed? Not at all, because it is not the observance of the law that brings the curse it is reliance upon the law that brings the curse. This is where we must look at context (and also at the verse itself). Galatians 3:10 says that "all those who rely..." Rely is a keyword in that verse, especially in context of the rest of Galatians 3. The problem was not in following the law, but in relying on the law for salvation. The essence of Galatians 3 is that salvation is through faith, not through observance of the law, and if man relies on the law then he is also bound by those curses of the law, but the law is not against God and is beneficial. That could sum up the entire essence of Galatians 3.

The law itself is not the problem, it is reliance on the law for salvation that Paul is saying is the problem. So, what are these curses? We must then back up to where Galatians 3:10 (second half of verse) comes from to see the curses. Galatians 3:10b "for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them'." The origin: Deuteronomy 27:26 "‘Cursed is the one who does not confirm (all) the words of this law by observing them'," The version I have used here uses the word "all" in Deuteronomy, but it must be noted that in the original Hebrew the word all was not in there. It could be argued that it was implied. If you look at the previous verses in Deuteronomy then you can see where the curses were attached to:

Deut 27:15-26 Cursed is the one who makes a carved or molded image, an abomination to the LORD, the work of the hands of the craftsman, and sets it up in secret. And all the people shall answer and say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who treats his father or his mother with contempt. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who moves his neighbor’s landmark. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’
Cursed is the one who makes the blind to wander off the road. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’
Cursed is the one who perverts the justice due the stranger, the fatherless, and widow. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who lies with his father’s wife, because he has uncovered his father’s bed. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who lies with any kind of animal. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who lies with his sister, the daughter of his father or the daughter of his mother. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who lies with his mother-in-law. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who attacks his neighbor secretly. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who takes a bribe to slay an innocent person. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ Cursed is the one who does not confirm all the words of this law by observing them. And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’”

Then Deuteronomy 28 gives us the blessings and the curses. (I won't list them here.) In Galatians, Paul was saying that if you rely on the law for your salvation, then you are also subject to the curses of the law for breaking it. But again, it does not mean that observing the law is bad nor wrong. One can observe the law without relying on the law for salvation. The curse of the law has been removed, but it does not mean that man now has free license to disobey the law.

To answer your question, no, it is not a light matter to bring a curse upon oneself from God. But following the law does not bring the curse. I think it is clear in Paul's own actions when he had Timothy circumcised in accordance with the law, that following it is not what brings the curse. It is the reliance on the law for salvation, rather than faith, that then subjects man to the law and all the curses that go along with breaking it. The law is not bad, and choosing to observe the law out of love for God will not bring disfavor with God.

Hope you are feeling better.

Paul's action in circumcising Timothy was not with a view to return to the Mosaic Law. It was done to make it possible for Timothy to preach to the Jews with freeness of speach.

Galatians 4:9-11 says this also: "how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you."

Paul calls the things of the Mosaic Law "weak and miserable". And they are when compared to the far better arrangement with Jesus' ransom sacrifice. If a Christian devoted himself to carrying out all of the requirements of the Mosaic Law, even if in his heart he viewed them as meaningless, others would take note of his actions and would imagine that this was something needed for salvation. I know many who believe that Christians are still under the Ten Commandments and many churches have mistakenly taught that work is forbidden on Sunday.

But Paul didn't view it as optional whether or not one would continue to follow the Law. He saw it as imperative that Christians should not observe it. Jesus' perfect sacrifice fulfilled every requirement of the Mosaic Law, effectively bringing it to an end (like a debt that had been fully paid). After a loan has been completely settled you don't still continue to pay installments do you? In the same way Christians should see themselves as being in no way at all under the Mosaic Law.

 

[PouringRain]

Paul's action in circumcising Timothy was not with a view to return to the Mosaic Law. It was done to make it possible for Timothy to preach to the Jews with freeness of speach.

I agree, but it also shows that observing a law does not enslave one into bondage of the law. There is no problem with observing the law.

Galatians 4:9-11 says this also: "how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you."

Paul calls the things of the Mosaic Law "weak and miserable". And they are when compared to the far better arrangement with Jesus' ransom sacrifice. If a Christian devoted himself to carrying out all of the requirements of the Mosaic Law, even if in his heart he viewed them as meaningless, others would take note of his actions and would imagine that this was something needed for salvation. I know many who believe that Christians are still under the Ten Commandments and many churches have mistakenly taught that work is forbidden on Sunday.

Back up to verse 8 and you will see that passage refers to those who had converted from paganism, and is not referring to the mosaic law. Galatians 4:8 "Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods....." That passage would be better used to argue against the observance of holidays that are founded in paganism.

I wrote quite a bit on the law already, so I won't go back over it again.

But Paul didn't view it as optional whether or not one would continue to follow the Law. He saw it as imperative that Christians should not observe it. Jesus' perfect sacrifice fulfilled every requirement of the Mosaic Law, effectively bringing it to an end (like a debt that had been fully paid). After a loan has been completely settled you don't still continue to pay installments do you? In the same way Christians should see themselves as being in no way at all under the Mosaic Law.

Paul never said it is imperative that Christians not follow the law. Those are your words, not his. All through his writing it can be seen that the problems are as I mentioned before: 1) bondage to the law/ reliance on the law, and 2) judging others by the law.

 

[Hiroshi]

Pouring Rain,

Sorry that I haven't replied to you yet. I have been really, really busy and quite unwell (like you). I haven't forgotten you and I will get back to you soon.

 

[PouringRain]

Pouring Rain,

Sorry that I haven't replied to you yet. I have been really, really busy and quite unwell (like you). I haven't forgotten you and I will get back to you soon.

That's fine. Take your time. I hope you feel well soon.

I will say that the majority of Christians, imo, probably take the same stance as you on this topic. The one thing we all agree on is that salvation is through faith, and the law is not what saves. I have been in a wide range of churches throughout my life from legalistic to quite liberal. On a personal level, I have difficulty with the lackadaisical attitudes displayed in many churches. I do not go to church to watch go-go dancers on the stage. (That was not an exaggeration. :giggling: ) On the flip side, extreme legalism is certainly detrimental as well. When someone teaches that man is cursed because the sabbath is observed on Sunday rather than the day it was originally intended, and blames all sorts of illness and maladies on things like that, then there is a problem.

For me, when Jesus gave the two commandments and said that all the laws are within the two (and certainly they are) the difference is a shift from observing the law out f a strict legalism, to observing the law based in love for God and man. It is a difference in observing the sabbath from Friday sundown to Saturday sundown with all the intricate man-created interpretations of the law, to a shift in an understanding that observing the sabbath and keeping it holy is really about taking a day (any day) to set aside to devote to rest and to God. God gave us a day of rest, because he knows our bodies need it. It is for our physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual well being. The intention was never about what the Jews created it to be. I am certainly not ignorant about how their interpretations of the laws have led to such impossible practices that they enslave themselves. I think most people actually do not realize how stringent the interpretations are. It is beyond observing at a set time, and "not working". Not working includes not flipping a light switch, not being allowed to learn new material (mental activity), not being allowed to carry things, not doing the dishes, etc. The problem is not with the law, but the interpretation, and reliance on it, and judging others based upon it. I only used the sabbath as an example of one law. Jesus often pointed out the hypocrisy in the Jews manner of observing the law. I am certainly not in favor of legalistic attitudes.

I was going to say more, but I'll step off the soapbox for now. I really should be trying to take a nap.

In the end we will probably have to agree to disagree.

 

[Hiroshi]

That's fine. Take your time. I hope you feel well soon.

I will say that the majority of Christians, imo, probably take the same stance as you on this topic. The one thing we all agree on is that salvation is through faith, and the law is not what saves. I have been in a wide range of churches throughout my life from legalistic to quite liberal. On a personal level, I have difficulty with the lackadaisical attitudes displayed in many churches. I do not go to church to watch go-go dancers on the stage. (That was not an exaggeration. :giggling: ) On the flip side, extreme legalism is certainly detrimental as well. When someone teaches that man is cursed because the sabbath is observed on Sunday rather than the day it was originally intended, and blames all sorts of illness and maladies on things like that, then there is a problem.

For me, when Jesus gave the two commandments and said that all the laws are within the two (and certainly they are) the difference is a shift from observing the law out f a strict legalism, to observing the law based in love for God and man. It is a difference in observing the sabbath from Friday sundown to Saturday sundown with all the intricate man-created interpretations of the law, to a shift in an understanding that observing the sabbath and keeping it holy is really about taking a day (any day) to set aside to devote to rest and to God. God gave us a day of rest, because he knows our bodies need it. It is for our physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual well being. The intention was never about what the Jews created it to be. I am certainly not ignorant about how their interpretations of the laws have led to such impossible practices that they enslave themselves. I think most people actually do not realize how stringent the interpretations are. It is beyond observing at a set time, and "not working". Not working includes not flipping a light switch, not being allowed to learn new material (mental activity), not being allowed to carry things, not doing the dishes, etc. The problem is not with the law, but the interpretation, and reliance on it, and judging others based upon it. I only used the sabbath as an example of one law. Jesus often pointed out the hypocrisy in the Jews manner of observing the law. I am certainly not in favor of legalistic attitudes.

I was going to say more, but I'll step off the soapbox for now. I really should be trying to take a nap.

In the end we will probably have to agree to disagree.

Go-go dancers? Good heavens!

Sorry, I have not posted to anyone for a while because I have been so busy. But now back to the discussion. Paul uses a word a number of times that means "the basic, elementary things" of this wicked world.

Colossians 2:8 "See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ."
Colossians 2:20 "Since you died with Christ to the basic principles of this world, why, as though you still belonged to it, do you submit to its rules"?
Galatians 4:3 "So also, when we were children, we were in slavery under the basic principles of the world."
Galatians 4:9 "But now that you know God—or rather are known by God—how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again?"

Reading through Galatians chapter 4 and Colossians chapter 2 it becomes clear that this expression does not only mean the requirements of the Mosaic Law. But it does include it.

Colossians 2:8 mentions human philosophy and traditions. And Colossians 2:16-17 unquestionably speaks of the Law requirements of the Sabbath and other things. But also listed there are things that the Law did not require like asceticism (Colossians 2:23) and worship of angels (Colossians 2:18).

Now, as you pointed out, Galatians 4:8 does speak specifically of pagan idolatry and practices. But when, in the next verse, Paul then refers to the "weak and miserable principles" he still includes in this expression also the keeping of the Mosaic Law, along with other worldly ideas and practices. Indeed, most of what he has to say in his letter to the Galatians has to do with Christians not keeping the Law of Moses. In Galatians 6:12-13 Paul says: "Those who want to make a good impression outwardly are trying to compel you to be circumcised. The only reason they do this is to avoid being persecuted for the cross of Christ. Not even those who are circumcised obey the law, yet they want you to be circumcised that they may boast about your flesh."

Obviously, Jews were making a big issue here and persecuting those who did not get circumcised. Paul was exhorting Christians to take a firm stand and not to give in to the pressure.

 

[PouringRain]

Obviously, Jews were making a big issue here and persecuting those who did not get circumcised. Paul was exhorting Christians to take a firm stand and not to give in to the pressure.

Your words here agree with what I said about one of the problems being judging other based upon the law. None of it shows that man is not permitted to follow the law if he chooses, nor that the law in itself is bad/wrong. It is the interpretation (and application) of the law that became problematic and wrong.

Just as Galatians was also speaking to former pagan members, the letter to the Colossians was speaking to heretical teachings that had arisen in the church, and gnosticism.

 

[Hiroshi]

Just as Galatians was also speaking to former pagan members, the letter to the Colossians was speaking to heretical teachings that had arisen in the church, and gnosticism.

I agree with everything that you say here. But I disagreed with you when you said that the "special days and months and seasons and years" (Galatians 4:10) refer to pagan celebrations. I believe that this was instead a reference to Jewish festivals celebrated under the Mosaic Law (even though the Galatians had been pagans, not Jews). Paul says much the same thing in the same context to the Colossians: "with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come" (Colossians 2:16-17). These are obviously requirements of the Mosaic Law.

Your words here agree with what I said about one of the problems being judging other based upon the law. None of it shows that man is not permitted to follow the law if he chooses, nor that the law in itself is bad/wrong. It is the interpretation (and application) of the law that became problematic and wrong.

A difficulty here is that the early Christians were not concerned with someone choosing to follow the Mosaic Law simply because he likes it. They were concerned with whether or not it was a requirement from God, even after the ransom sacrifice had been provided. The answer was: no, it wasn't a requirement.

In these circumstances it seems inappropriate for a Christian to observe the Law, which would cause others to think that it was required.