Bible Study
See other Bible Study Articles
Title: Christ and the Law Part 1
Source:
Grace to You ministries
URL Source: https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/2209
Published: Oct 13, 2017
Author: John MacArthur
Post Date: 2017-10-13 12:13:50 by redleghunter
Ping List: *Bible Study Ping* Subscribe to *Bible Study Ping*
Keywords: None
Views: 1097
Comments: 22
Part 1 excerpt: Our Lord says, "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy them but to fulfill them. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men to do so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven." [...] In a recent book entitled The Interaction of Law and Religion, Harold J. Berman, who is a professor of law at Harvard University, and one of the most outstanding professors there, has developed a very significant thesis. His thesis in the book is that Western culture has had a massive loss of confidence in law and a massive loss of confidence in religion. He sees that one of the causes is the radical separation of one from the other, and his conclusion is that you cannot have law, or rules for behavior, without religion, because it is religion that provides the absolute base for morality and law. The man is not a Christian, but certainly, we would have to agree with his thesis. He fears that Western culture is doomed to relativism in law because of the loss of an absolute. We have broken away from religion, from the concept of God, from absolute truth, and therefore we are stuck with existential relativism when it comes to making laws. He says that law and religion will stand together or law and religion will fall together. Religion-less law could never command authority; there must be a transcendent value, a super-rational absolute. In his book, he quotes professor Thomas Frank of NYU. Frank says, "Law has become undisguisedly a pragmatic human process. It is made by men, and it lays no claim to divine origin or eternal validity." This leads professor Frank to the view that a judge in a court reaching a decision is not propounding a truth but is rather experimenting in the solution of a problem. If his decision is reversed by a higher court, or if it is subsequently overruled, that doesn't mean it was wrong, only that it was, or became in the course of time, unsatisfactory. "Having broken away from religion," Frank states, "Law is now characterized by existential relativism. Indeed, it is now generally recognized that no judicial decision is ever final, that the law follows the event, is not eternal or certain, is made by man and is not divine or true." Berman goes on to say, "If law is merely an experiment, and if judicial decisions are merely hunches, why should individuals or groups of people observe those legal rules or commands if they do not conform to their own interests?" He's right. Why am I quoting all of that? To tell you this: we are endeavoring, in our society, to have rules without an absolute. Court after court after court overturns some other ruling. When you abandon God and theology, you abandon truth. Trying to make laws without truth or an ultimate value is impossible. You cannot build a consistent legal system on philosophical humanism, a fluctuating, changing principle of what is right and what is wrong. In the latest issue of Esquire Magazine, there is an article by a man named Peter Steinfels. The article is entitled "The Reasonable Right." He says this, "How can moral principles be grounded and social institutions ultimately legitimated in the absence of a religiously-based culture?" The answer is that they cannot. So some people are hinting at the issue, secular people like Steinfels and Berman and others. The are hinting at this issue: if there is no absolute truth, and no absolute word, and no God who sets the standard, then there can be no real law. You'll never get people to keep laws that are only judicial guesses. So we ask ourselves, "What is the absolute source of truth? What is the absolute standard of morality? What is the absolute rule of justice? Where does this evil society, floating on a sea of relativism, find its anchor?" That's the question. Is there a standard to live by? Is there an absolute authority? Is there an unchanging authority, and inviolable law? In the verses I just read to you from Matthew 5:17-20, we find that, indeed, there is. That law is none other than the law of God. Jesus said that not one jot or tittle will pass from that law until everything is fulfilled. He did not come in any whit to set it aside but to fulfill it. Anyone who teaches another to break the least of those commandments is the least in the Kingdom. In other words, God has laid down an absolute, eternal, abiding law. In fact, in John 17:17, Jesus said to the Father, "Thy word is truth." Recently, people have been questioning this in terms of Christianity, and more particularly, in my own case. A lady called the other day from a magazine which will be printing another article on whether the Bible ought to be believed in terms of the home. She said to me, "It seems to me that you don't realize times have changed. The Bible doesn't fit today anymore." I said, "That isn't the way it is; the way it is is that today doesn't fit the Bible anymore. It's today that's wrong, not the Bible." Someone else said to me, on a radio program, "That's your interpretation. Everyone has their own interpretation, and that's the way you interpret it." The point is this: if the Bible confronts you where you don't want to be confronted, then say, "The Bible is out-of-date," or, "The Bible needs to be reinterpreted." Don't face the reality that maybe you are out-of-date and need to be reinterpreted. That's the perspective. People today want to reinterpret the Bible, to deny its authority. Chapters we once believed to be written by God are now said to be written by some rabbi who added it in. Portions of the Scripture that we don't agree with or abide by, we just shuffle off, out of the picture. We reinterpret the verses to say what we want them to say; we say, "That's cultural and doesn't relate to today." Anything at all to evade allowing the Bible to confront us in our time and place in the history of the world. Jesus is saying that not one jot or tittle will pass from it, every bit of it will be fulfilled. He did not abrogate or annul one whit of it, and anyone who teaches anyone else to disobey the smallest command in the Bible will be the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. Nothing ever changes in the Bible, nothing! We will see in our study that this is Jesus' view of God's law. By the way, whatever Jesus thinks of the Bible is what I want to think of it. Frankly, I get weary of the fact that people are constantly overturning historical interpretations, things that the church has believed for centuries, throwing them out if they conflict with the evil of today. They want to deny that the Bible is inerrant, they want to say, "There are errors in the Bible and that's one of them," or, "The Bible isn't really all inspired, or it certainly isn't authoritative. It's just a cultural thing. You can't take everything it says," so we redefine Scripture to fit our sin. That's what's happening in our society today. The sad thing is, if you think it's tough on a society like ours, a secular society, to find an anchor, it's even tough on so-called Christianity because so-called Christianity is busy about denying the Bible. Without an absolute base, there will be no standard of behavior, and we will drift along like the world - without an anchor. Poster Comment: Part 1 of a 4 part series of sermons from John MacArthur. Text and video at source link.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
In this series John MacArthur answers these questions and provides valuable insights regarding.. The reasons law and religion are inseparable The different perspectives about the law at the time of Christ The importance of law in the context of Jesus' sermon The ways in which Jesus fulfilled the law How the Sabbath is fulfilled on a daily basis The purpose of the law The element of the law that is still binding on you How you can become the greatest in the Kingdom
The Catholic Church, of course. It's the only possible answer.
The Catholic Church, of course. It's the only possible answer. Wait; The Vatican, this Pope and it's minions...and NOT the Bible?? I hope you're going to re-think your answer.
Of course. The Bible says what each individual separate reader wants it to say. To know what it means, you need authority, and it was the Catholic Church that was vested with the authority by God to decide that. The Holy Spirit lives within the Church, so when the Church speaks on matters of doctrine, that's God speaking directly, even when the men through whom he speaks are quite flawed.
To know what it means, you need authority, and it was the Catholic Church that was vested with the authority by God to decide that. Yes, the Bible is intended to speak to us as individuals. IF the Holy Spirit resides in us. As an aside, unfortunately for centuries the RCC banned regular people from owning a Bible, thus that original intent of individual interpretation was heavily censored by law, leaving ONLY RCC clergy to do the "interpreting." Wasn't it the disciples of Christ as inspired by the Almighty who'd received HIS wishes directly? And wrote down the Father's doctrines as well as Jesus' Gospel on THEIR "Authority"? The early Church can be credited with being guided by the Holy Spirit, retaining scriptural writings and helping cobble what became the "Bible." No where is it written in Scripture that "Catholic Church" or "tradition" was to be THE source of THE doctrine of Christianity or speak as THE authority of Jesus Christ or the Father. I realize you'll cite Jesus', "On this rock" [Peter] or secession of Popes (including Constantine) as RCC's "vested authority," but it's just not true. "Tradition" is irrelevant to Salvation. The "Grace" of God through belief in His Son is ALL THAT MATTERS. John 3:16 (KJV): "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 14:6 (KJV): "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." NOT, "But by the RCC." Ephesians 2:8,9 (KJV): "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God; Not of works, lest any man should boast." Furthermore -- as if any more proof was needed that the Vatican is NOT the source of moral authority and keeper of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Vatican is NOT spreading the Gospel while the current Pope himself is fulfilling Isaiah 5:20 (without so much as a peep from RCC clergy.)
If you think such start your own thread.
"Tradition" is irrelevant to Salvation. The "Grace" of God through belief in His Son is ALL THAT MATTERS. John 3:16 (KJV): "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 14:6 (KJV): "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." NOT, "But by the RCC." Ephesians 2:8,9 (KJV): "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God; Not of works, lest any man should boast." Furthermore -- as if any more proof was needed that the Vatican is NOT the source of moral authority and keeper of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Vatican is NOT spreading the Gospel while the current Pope himself is fulfilling Isaiah 5:20 (without so much as a peep from RCC clergy.) Vic just wants to start another long thread where AKA and other folks will come in and skither (Gaelic for loads of sheep poop) all over the thread. Vic you have your own threads, please don't poop on mine.
Ok. But actually I meant what I said. I'm not joking at all when I say that what God meant by the Bible is what the Catholic Church says he meant. I do recognize that I'm the only Catholic in the room, and the only one who believes that, so I'll step away at your request.
biblehub.com/kjv/luke/12.htm Not Peace, But Division (Matthew 10:34-36) 49 I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled? 50But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished! 51Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: 52For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. 53The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+10%3A34&version=KJV Matthew 10:34King James Version (KJV) 34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
"The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." ~ Jesus Christ We are just now beginning to see just that; Family and friends (mostly women of course) whose blind rage and hate is causing them to permanently cut off and end long-time friendships and family relations through social media over President Trump (thought at its root are those Progs who will not accept ANY opinion or position other than theirs -- pro-Abortion, pro-socialist, pro-Gay, anti-God.) Eventually, this will become exactly as prophesied: Belief in the Gospel itself shall be THE single point of contention and division within families.
HA! (Never hoid dat one.)
His thesis in the book is that Western culture has had a massive loss of confidence in law and a massive loss of confidence in religion. He sees that one of the causes is the radical separation of one from the other... ...His conclusion is that you cannot have law, or rules for behavior, without religion, because it is religion that provides the absolute base for morality and law. The man is not a Christian, but certainly, we would have to agree with his thesis. He fears that Western culture is doomed to relativism in law because of the loss of an absolute. We have broken away from religion, from the concept of God, from absolute truth, and therefore we are stuck with existential relativism when it comes to making laws. He says that law and religion will stand together or law and religion will fall together. Religion-less law could never command authority; there must be a transcendent value, a super-rational absolute. Prof Berman's thesis isn't actually so "significant" other than it's come from a Harvard, bastion of Humanism, Progressivism and anti-Christianity. Now even the irreligious and non-Christians concede that Western Civ and it's so-called "Intelligentsia" have plunged society straight into the abyss of Moral Relativism. A lack of definitive "Right and Wrong" can only devolve civilization into anarchy. Perhaps Prof Berman can convince his own Prog brethren to help join hands in standing with Christians to uphold Western Civilization's pillars of Law: THE BIBLE. As goes the Christian World, so goes common sense Law, Civilization, and Freedom. Secular Humanism lead man to a dead end -- in THIS world as well as the next.
We are also seeing this become reality in the Middle East since 2011 and spreading to the West (the US). Just keep watching.
That is a lie. Why only Peter? Did Jesus send the others in vain?
Despite being wrong you do have some good qualities.
I was going to write a response this comment. Then I thought Ken Ham already said it better. https://answersingenesis.org/why-does-creation-matter/crumbling-foundations/
Yup. We are starting to see this here: Wheat. Chaff. People are going to be forced to make the biggest decision and commitment of their lives; WILL THEY LIVE FOR THIS WORLD? OR THE NEXT? Most people don't realize how committed Middle Eastern Christians are to their faith, and to what extent they are standing uncompromisingly on the word and Gospel of Jesus Christ. Even under severe duress and threats of torture from demonic Moslem tormentors.
Stone, I think Vic is honoring Red's request to back off the thread, knowing it's a volatile issue that would blow up. Or else I believe he would answer you here.
If you destroy the foundations of anything, the structure will collapse. If you want to destroy any building, you are guaranteed early success if you destroy the foundations. Likewise, if one wants to destroy Christianity, then destroy the foundations established in the Book of Genesis. Is it any wonder that Satan is attacking Genesis more than any other book? Nice link... Ham hits the nail on the head. Genesis provides the foundation for Creation, ALL faith in God and His Plan. Ergo, cratering it has become THE Ground-Zero obsession of Militant Atheists and Humanists (who've hijacked the so-called Scientific Communitah.) Through "Evolution," these phonies have been trying discredit (they can never disprove) the validity of Genesis. The comically fake, not-close-to-proving Theory of Evolution is the jackhammer with which Fake Science and the Enemies of Christianity attack our faith. For an excellent, easy-to-read highly informative book on the utter evisceration of what is actually the Impossible Theory of "Evolution" (from every angle), I highly suggest reading, 'The Evolution Handbook'. Good one for kids and teens as well. Covers all the bases. Simple to understand; Fascinating facts; Provides wild trivial factoids on God's creation (that could NEVER happen "by chance.") http://www.chick.com/catalog/books/1254.asp
Also nuking Genesis throws out God's design for marriage.
Correct
I appreciate that both of you gentlemen are taking your 'war' elsewhere. If you both determine reconciliation is at hand, I would be more than welcome to help facilitate. God Bless!
#2. To: redleghunter (#0)
So we ask ourselves, "What is the absolute source of truth? What is the absolute standard of morality? What is the absolute rule of justice? Where does this evil society, floating on a sea of relativism, find its anchor?"
#3. To: Vicomte13, redleghunter (#2)
("What is the absolute source of truth? What is the absolute standard of morality? What is the absolute rule of justice? Where does this evil society, floating on a sea of relativism, find its anchor?")
#4. To: Liberator (#3)
Wait; The Vatican, this Pope and it's minions...and NOT the Bible??
#5. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
The Bible says what each individual separate reader wants it to say.
#6. To: Vicomte13 (#2)
The Catholic Church, of course. It's the only possible answer.
#7. To: Liberator, Vicomte13 (#5)
Yes, the Bible is intended to speak to us as individuals. IF the Holy Spirit resides in us. As an aside, unfortunately for centuries the RCC banned regular people from owning a Bible, thus that original intent of individual interpretation was heavily censored by law, leaving ONLY RCC clergy to do the "interpreting." Wasn't it the disciples of Christ as inspired by the Almighty who'd received HIS wishes directly? And wrote down the Father's doctrines as well as Jesus' Gospel on THEIR "Authority"? The early Church can be credited with being guided by the Holy Spirit, retaining scriptural writings and helping cobble what became the "Bible." No where is it written in Scripture that "Catholic Church" or "tradition" was to be THE source of THE doctrine of Christianity or speak as THE authority of Jesus Christ or the Father. I realize you'll cite Jesus', "On this rock" [Peter] or secession of Popes (including Constantine) as RCC's "vested authority," but it's just not true.
#8. To: redleghunter (#7)
Vic you have your own threads, please don't poop on mine.
#9. To: redleghunter (#0)
#10. To: goldilucky (#9)
"Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.
#11. To: redleghunter (#7)
...Folks will come in and skither (Gaelic for loads of sheep poop) all over the thread.
#12. To: redleghunter (#0)
Harold J. Berman, who is a professor of law at Harvard University...has developed a very significant thesis.
#13. To: Liberator (#10)
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." ~ Jesus Christ
#14. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
(Edited)
To know what it means, you need authority, and it was the Catholic Church that was vested with the authority by God to decide that.
#15. To: Vicomte13 (#8)
I do recognize that I'm the only Catholic in the room, and the only one who believes that, so I'll step away at your request.
#16. To: redleghunter, vicomte13 (#0)
massive loss of confidence in law and a massive loss of confidence in religion.
#17. To: goldilucky (#13)
We are also seeing this [Christ's sword] become reality in the Middle East since 2011 and spreading to the West (the US). Just keep watching.
#18. To: A K A Stone, Vicomte13 (#14)
Why only Peter? Did Jesus send the others in vain?
#19. To: A K A Stone, redleghunter (#16)
If you want to destroy any building, you are guaranteed early success if you destroy the foundations.
#20. To: Liberator (#19)
#21. To: Liberator (#18)
Stone, I think Vic is honoring Red's request to back off the thread,
#22. To: Vicomte13, A K A Stone (#21)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]