Works Of The Law?

[charlesbarkley]

I have been reading Bob Sungenis and he emphatically states that Paul means that the entire Law was disposed of when Christ established the New Covenant. The term “works of the law” refers to the entire law. It does not just refer to the ceremonial law. The moral law as well as the ceremonial law was disposed of. When Paul, accroding to Sungenis, says in Romans 3:28 “That man is justified by faith apart from works of the law.” Paul means the entire law, not just the ceremonial law. What say you???

 

[Trishie]

Charles, I need to shut down the computer for now as my husband has just woken, but off the top of my head for the moment, read Luke18 verses 18-23. Jesus quotes the commandments, does not repudiate them but supports them and builds upon them. I think Jesus Christ, Son of the living God has got to be right here, not Bob Sungenis! Regards, Trishie.

Now to coffee, and maybe I’ll get back to you with more later if I can.

 

[thistle]

Matthew 19:16-19.

Jesus tells us to keep the Commandments.

 

[Swan]

I’m responding to this after failing to get a single response to my thread question about the OT being a collection of tribal law - and nothing else. The fact is that the OT was written by the Jews for the Jews and was never intended to apply to gentiles. Thus the squabble over dietary laws, circumcision, etc., which seemed to end in a pick and chose compromise. But, truly, the history of the Jews is not my history nor the history of any non-Jews so I fail to see why it applies. My suspicion is that the OT remains valid only insofar as the prophecies that are interpreted to predict the coming of Jesus. Again, I posed this question a few weeks ago and got not one response …

 

[Todd_Easton]

When Paul, accroding to Sungenis, says in Romans 3:28 “That man is justified by faith apart from works of the law.” Paul means the entire law, not just the ceremonial law. What say you???

What justifies us is the death of Jesus Christ, which we participate in in the Sacrament of faith, Baptism. Keeping the moral law is still necessary to preserve our justification but by itself keeping the moral law does not justify us.

One can hardly say that the moral law of the Old Covenant was “disposed of” since the moral law of the New Covenant is even stricter than that of the Old. While the Old Covenant forbids murder, the New Covenant forbids anger that could lead to murder. While the Old Covenant forbids adultery, the New Covenant forbids lust that could lead to adultery.

 

[charlesbarkley]

None of you actually answered my question. What does Paul mean by “works of the law?” Sungenis claims he means all of the law including the moral precepts. He also claims the Council of Trent and the Fathers of the Church deny the argument that “works of the law” only refer to the ceremonial law.
He says that we follow the ten commandments not because they are in the old covenant law, but because Jesus made those precepts part of the new covenant. They just so happen to also be in the “law.” any thoughts?

 

[Static]

I have been reading Bob Sungenis and he emphatically states that Paul means that the entire Law was disposed of when Christ established the New Covenant. The term “works of the law” refers to the entire law. It does not just refer to the ceremonial law. The moral law as well as the ceremonial law was disposed of. When Paul, accroding to Sungenis, says in Romans 3:28 “That man is justified by faith apart from works of the law.” Paul means the entire law, not just the ceremonial law. What say you???

By disposed of, I don't think he used that word to mean to *throw away*  or to *get rid of* in view of what the scriptures say in **Mt 5:17**. I think he used the word to mean to *put in order,*or* arrange in sequence* if that makes any sense.

St. Paul tells us in this chapter that man is justified without the works of the written law and that no works of the law of Moses, nor any works that a man does by the law of nature, are sufficient to justify a man, and save him of themselves, unless they be joined with faith, and the grace of God. This does not mean that faith alone is sufficient for one to be saved either.

What book of his are you reading & is this his wording or your choice of words ? If you read the rest of the chapter, by the way you worded Sungenis, it would be a contradiction of scripture .

Rom 3:29ff - Is He the God of the Jews only ? Is He not also of the Gentiles ? Yes, of the Gentiles also. For it is one God who justifieth circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. Do we then destroy the law through faith ? God forbid: but we establish the law.

Sungenis, among others, are a bit deep for me. I hope this helps, if not, sorry.

May God Bless, Static ( 1 Tim 1:15 )

 

[guanophore]

I have been reading Bob Sungenis and he emphatically states that Paul means that the entire Law was disposed of when Christ established the New Covenant. The term “works of the law” refers to the entire law. It does not just refer to the ceremonial law. The moral law as well as the ceremonial law was disposed of. When Paul, accroding to Sungenis, says in Romans 3:28 “That man is justified by faith apart from works of the law.” Paul means the entire law, not just the ceremonial law. What say you???

Jesus did not set aside the moral law.

I’m responding to this after failing to get a single response to my thread question about the OT being a collection of tribal law - and nothing else. The fact is that the OT was written by the Jews for the Jews and was never intended to apply to gentiles. Thus the squabble over dietary laws, circumcision, etc., which seemed to end in a pick and chose compromise. But, truly, the history of the Jews is not my history nor the history of any non-Jews so I fail to see why it applies. My suspicion is that the OT remains valid only insofar as the prophecies that are interpreted to predict the coming of Jesus. Again, I posed this question a few weeks ago and got not one response …

If I saw this I would have thought it was so preposterous I would not have responded.

I agree that the OT was written by the Jews for the Jews. I also agree that it is full of tribal law for the Jews. However, God chose to reveal Himself to humanity through the Jewish people. As Jesus said “salvation is of the Jews”. For this reason it is important to understand the OT because it reveals God’s relationship to His chosen people, and through them, to the world.

All that was written in the Hebrew scripture was written for our instruction:

Rom 15:4
" For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, so that by steadfastness and by the encouragement of the scriptures we might have hope."

God’s plan has always been for His chosen people to model His moral precepts to the world. If we don’t study these, then we will not appropriately appreciate how we, as the remnant, can manifest His moral precepts to the world.

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished.” Matt 5:17-19

Jesus did not abolish or “dispense” the Law. He fulfilled it. Until it is also fulfilled in mankind, then it will not pass away.

I disagree, then that the OT is “invalid”, for it foreshadows all that is revealed in the NT.

None of you actually answered my question. What does Paul mean by “works of the law?” Sungenis claims he means all of the law including the moral precepts. He also claims the Council of Trent and the Fathers of the Church deny the argument that “works of the law” only refer to the ceremonial law.
He says that we follow the ten commandments not because they are in the old covenant law, but because Jesus made those precepts part of the new covenant. They just so happen to also be in the “law.” any thoughts?

God’s moral law was written into the heart of man when he was created in the image and likeness of God. That moral law was the expectation centuries before the ceremonial law was written. We can see that everyone knew it was wrong for Cain to kill Able, before the 10 commandments were written. Again, in Egypt, everyone knew it was wrong for Moses to kill, even though God had not yet given him the commandments. God’s moral law trancsends the nation of Israel, both before and after he called them to Himself.

 

[Todd_Easton]

None of you actually answered my question. What does Paul mean by “works of the law?” Sungenis claims he means all of the law including the moral precepts. He also claims the Council of Trent and the Fathers of the Church deny the argument that “works of the law” only refer to the ceremonial law.
He says that we follow the ten commandments not because they are in the old covenant law, but because Jesus made those precepts part of the new covenant. They just so happen to also be in the “law.” any thoughts?

St. Paul seems to have in mind all the precepts of the Law, the moral ones as well as the ceremonial ones.

 

[rcjones]

None of you actually answered my question. What does Paul mean by “works of the law?”

Ro 9:32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
Ga 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
Ga 3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
Ga 3:5 He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

Your essential question goes back to the old discussion of faith and works.

Essentially, we were created to do good works:
Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

But because we haven’t done them, no amount of working overtime will make up for lost works. The option is to have someone else make up lost works for us (which they can’t because they are lacking themselves) or to die, or have someone else die for us.

We trust Christ has done this for us. The fact that we trust Christ has died for us to pay the penalty of not having the works we were created for, doesn’t change the fact we were created for good works and should continue in them.

Jesus summarized all the law, saying that if you comply with the spirit of His summary, you have complied with the letter of the law.
His summary is to love God and love you neighbor. In this He shows that the law could only imperfectly reveal the character of God.

Now that we have His spirit within us, we are able to love as He directed us to and do not need the law to tell us what not to do when we are following His Spirit in what to do.

I do not need a commandment to not commit adultery, because I love my wife. I do not need a commandment to tell me not to steal, because I love God for what He has provided.

 

[yinekka]

Try reading *The Salvation Controversy *by Jimmie Akin, it may be of help.

Remember that scripture has to be interpreted with the mind of the Church and if Mr Sungenis’ interpretation or any biblical exegete’s interpretion is not with the mind of the Church then it is just their opinion and we would be better off reading biblical interpretations by those authors who write with the mind of the Church.

 

[charlesbarkley]

Let me quote Sungenis directly:
The Whole Old Covenant Law Must be Set Aside:

"Now, before we go any further, let’s reiterate WHY it is necessary for the WHOLE Old Covenant to be set aside. Paul teaches it best in Galatians 3:10-12 (the verses which I pointed out earlier that St. Thomas Aquinas used):

10 For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them.’ 11 Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, ‘The righteous man shall live by faith.’ 12 However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, ‘He who practices them shall live by them.’

Notice that Paul uses the same phrase “works of the Law” that he used in Romans and earlier in Galatians 2. But here he emphasizes the overarching principle connected to that phrase. That principle says that those who are in the system of “works of the law” are under a CURSE if they don’t perform “ALL THINGS written in the book of the Law.” That means if you break only one command of the Law, no matter how trivial, you are under the curse of damnation.

Why? Because the Law can show no mercy. It is an inanimate entity with no personality. It says “OBEY” and if you do not obey it has no choice but to condemn you. It is a legal system only. Legal systems have no room for mercy and forgiveness. The only one who has room for mercy and forgiveness is God, a being who can be moved with compassion and pity. The only thing God asks from us in return is faith in Him that He can do what He says. When we show him faith, He has mercy on us. If we showed faith to the Law, the Law wouldn’t care, for it has no concern for how much you believe in the Law. The Law is only interested in one thing, and that is to condemn for disobedience and to reward for obedience.

That Paul is referring to the whole law of Moses in Galatians 3:10-12 is proven by the verses from which he quotes. The saying “Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them” comes from Deuteronomy 27:26. The context of Deuteronomy 27:15-25 lists all the commandments of the Decalogue, in one form or another:

15 ‘Cursed is the man who makes an idol or a molten 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.’ 16 ‘Cursed is he who dishonors his father or mother.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’ 17 ‘Cursed is he who moves his neighbor’s boundary mark.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’ 18 ‘Cursed is he who misleads a blind person on the road.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’ 19 ‘Cursed is he who distorts the justice due an alien, orphan, and widow.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’ 20 ‘Cursed is he who lies with his father’s wife, because he has uncovered his father’s skirt.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’ 21 ‘Cursed is he who lies with any animal.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’ 22 ‘Cursed is he who lies with his sister, the daughter of his father or of his mother.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’ 23 ‘Cursed is he who lies with his mother-in-law.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’ 24 ‘Cursed is he who strikes his neighbor in secret.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’ 25 ‘Cursed is he who accepts a bribe to strike down an innocent person.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’ 26 ‘Cursed is he who does not confirm the words of this law by doing them.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’

We see the same principle reiterated in the book of James. In James 2:10-13 he writes:

10 “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all. 11 For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not commit murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty. 13 For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment.”

Here we see that the abiding principle throughout the New Testament is that if you base your salvation on law, then you subject yourself to the demands of the law. The law demands that if you stumble in one point, then you are guilty of disobeying all, and thus you will be condemned with everyone else. Notice that James tells them to seek to be judged by the “law of liberty” where there is mercy, for it is only the God of mercy that can forgive transgressions. The Law can never forgive, for it was never designed to do so.

 

[charlesbarkley]

Sungenis continues:
"Incidentally, why do you think James speaks of the sin of “murder” in this context? The answer will reveal to us the nature of the New Covenant. The context begins from James 2:1 through 2:9. In it, James admonishes the Christians for showing favoritism to the rich man and despising the poor man. In doing so he says in verse 8 that they are ignoring the command to “love your neighbor as yourself,” and thereby, he says in verse 9, that they are “committing sin.” If we remember what Jesus taught in Matthew 5:21-23 that I mentioned earlier, we can see why James associates the sin of “murder” with despising the poor man. For in despising him, we have made a fool of him, and thereby we have spiritually murdered him. Thus we see how sensitive the New Covenant is. It is not merely interested in outward behavior, but the behavior of the heart.

Now back to the Law. Let’s look at another passage which teaches the same principle (that the WHOLE law had to be set aside for grace to come). Colossians 2:13-14 says:

13 “When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions, 14 having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.”

Notice again that Paul is speaking to Gentiles, since he uses the phrase “the uncircumcision of your flesh.” He tells them that there sins were forgiven by God “having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us.” What does this “certificate of debt consisting of decrees” refer to? Well, it cannot refer to the Jewish ceremonial law, for that was never “against” the Gentiles. Rather, it refers to the whole Law found in the Old Covenant, the Law that was originally given to Adam and perpetuated through Israel until the time of Christ, where it was finally “nailed to the cross.”

Paul teaches something similar in Ephesians 2:15, but with a little twist. He writes:

15 by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace, 16 and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by it having put to death the enmity.

Notice the precise phrasing “the Law of commandments contained in ordinances.” The Greek is “to:n novmon tw:n ejntolw:n ejn dovgmasin,” which literally means “the law of the commandments in decrees.” This can be none other than the WHOLE law of the Old Covenant. In fact, the word “ordinances” (dovgmasin) is the same word used in Colossians 2:14 in the phrase “certificate of debt.”

Now, the “twist” Paul adds to this is to say that the setting aside of the Old Covenant law resulted in making Jew and Gentile into one body. Here is one of those places where the “Jew/Gentile” theme appears right along side the “grace versus law” theme. We find that, just as Romans 3:9-20 said that the Gentiles were “under the law” and that “works of the law” could not justify either Jew of Gentile, so we find here in Ephesians 2:15 that the Gentiles were under the law and condemned. Again, this shows us that the Law must refer to the WHOLE law."

 

[rcjones]

Good post. Thanks. I have never read any Sungenis. But I will now look for him.

But, ya know…no matter how well it’s explained, someone always comes back and says. “That means I can willfully sin.”

And the answer always has to be, nope. You were not created to sin. You were created to do good works, and that purpose predates any law.