Law and Grace – Part 1

What is Law?

for by the law is the knowledge of sin.  Rom 3:20

Romans 7:7 says I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

1 John3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

Mirror points out the dirt on our face, likewise Law shows us what is sin. It gives us the knowledge of what is sin.

Why we need grace?

Romans 6: 23 says For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

This is the understanding of grace…….
Wages of sin(breaking commandments) is Death. Penalty for breaking the Law is Death.

But Gods grace forgives our sin i.e., the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. grace forgives us our sin and gives a chance to repent. so we wont sin anymore i.e., we wont transgress law anymore

Romans 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
When paul says we are not under Law it means we are not under the punishment we have to face for breaking the Law.
In the very next verse paul says Romans 6: 15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.
Shall we break the Law(shall we sin) since we are under grace. God forbids. No.
To whom the Ten commandments (Law) is given?

First recorded in Sinai when given to Israelites but The Moral law was given to entire humanity from the beginning.

Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws. Gen 26: 5

‘Where no law is, there is no transgression,” “for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” Rom. l:15; 3:20. If Cain didn’t have knowledge of sin which is Law he wont charged with the penalty of sin which is breaking Law. for by the law is the knowledge of sin.  Rom 3:20

Joseph feared God because He knows adultery is breaking God’s Law. From where did he learned that committing adultery is against God. Only from Law.

“Sin is the transgression of the law,” says John. “I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shall not covet.” Rom. 7:7. And what law says, “Thou shall not covet”? The Ten -Commandment law.

And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath Mark 2:27 Jesus says Sabbath was made for man He didn’t say Sabbath was made (only) for Jews.

From answers to objection by Francis F Nichol.

Objection:The very wording of the Sinaitic law proves that it was designed only for the Jews. The Ten Commandments is introduced thus: ‘I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee . . . out of the house of bondage’ (Ex. 20:2). To whom is that applicable? Only to the Israelite nation, of course.” See also Deuteronomy 4:8, Romans 9:4, and similar passages, which state specifically that the law was given only to the Israelites.
We would ask: To whom else could the Lord have given the ‘Ten Commandments? To the Egyptians, the Philistines, the Amalekites, the Hittites, the Jebusites, or any other of the many pagan peoples that cursed the earth with their unholy presence? No, you say. God could not make a revelation of Himself to any people until that people were of a mind and heart to hear Him. God found in Abraham and his descendants such a people. Accordingly He gave to them a revelation of His will and ways. Yes, He spoke exclusively that great day at Sinai to a literal people called Israelites, who had been delivered from a literal bondage in Egypt. But, we inquire again: To whom else could He have spoken?

We would further inquire: To whom was God speaking when He gave His great messages through Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, and all the mighty prophets of 0ld Testament times? The answer is, To the Israelites. The inspired messages that constitute tile Old Testament were addressed almost wholly to the Jews, and the prophets who delivered the messages were Jews. But does any lover of the Bible wish to suggest that therefore the beautiful messages of salvation in Isaiah, for example, which are so often addressed directly to Jerusalem, are not also addressed to us? We doubt not that many a Christian minister has taken for his text these typical words from Isaiah: “Cry aloud, spare not, lift tip thy voice like a trumpet, and show thy people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins.” Isa. 58:1. But no listener in the pew is troubled or confused or informs the preacher that the text is addressed to Jews, not Gentiles.

 And who are the writers of the New Testament? With one possible exception they are all Jews. To whom did Christ address virtually all that He said while on earth? To the Jews. To whom is  the Epistle to the Hebrews addressed? Obviously, to Jews. To whom is the Epistle of James addressed?  “To the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad.” James 1: 1. But does any Christian have difficulty  with these facts, or feel that any portions of the New Testament are not really for him? No.  In the objection before us, Romans 9:4 is cited. It reads as follows: “Who are Israelites; to whom pertains the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the
service of God, and the promises.” Evidently it is offered as proof because it says that “the giving of the  law” was to them. But it says more than that. The “covenants” also were given to them. Note the plural. Both the old and the new covenant! The new covenant is made with the “house of Israel, and with the house of Judah.” (Jer. 31:31; Heb. 8:8.) But does any Christian believe that the new covenant is confined to the believing Jew? No. We all claim a part in it and believe that the new covenant promise
is intended for us as well, even though the announcement of it is addressed directly, and apparently exclusively, to the Jews.  The words of Moses in Deuteronomy 4:8 are also cited. They read as follows: “And what nation is there so great, that bath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day?” We would simply say that this statement is a good commentary on Romans 9:4. And we  have found that this verse in Romans proves more than the objector desires. Another inspired comment on Deuteronomy 4:8 is the statement of Christ: “Salvation is of the Jews.” John 4:22. But has any  Christian despised salvation because of this fact?
We must never forget that the revelations and admonitions of the Scriptures are not given in a vacuum. Almost always they are placed in the context of historical events and  flesh-and-blood people. The sermon on the mount has as literally a rocky platform as the address from Sinai. And the multitudes addressed in that sermon were as definitely Jewish as the hosts gathered before Sinai. Often God took occasion in giving a revelation, or invoking a certain course of conduct, to refer to some actual experience through which the listeners had passed. That is one of the marks of Bible revelations. But that fact in itself never troubles any of us, nor prevents us from believing that those counsels of  God’s Word apply to us as well.
Now, inasmuch as God worked mighty miracles to draw out of the turbulent sea of paganism a  people for Himself, how appropriate that He should place His eternal revelation to them in the context of the immediate experience that they had miraculously through. Thus they might be prompted to give that revelation maximum weight in their minds and be most diligent in obeying it. Furthermore, that historical context provides a setting that we today, who are also flesh and blood, can understand, and, understanding, be likewise prompted to greater obedience to God. Well does the Bible commentator  Murphy observe on Exodus 20:2: “This [deliverance out of Egypt] in the manner of Scripture and of Providence is the earnest and the guarantee of their deliverance from all other and greater kinds of bondage. The present is the type of a grander future. We must descend the stream of revelation to the New Testament before we fathom the depths of this greatest deliverance.”-JAMES G. MURPHY, Commentary on the Book of Exodus.
Any display of God’s mercy and deliverance to His children at any moment in earth’s history is a reason why those living at that time and those who read of the account in all subsequent ages should serve Him with their whole heart and obey His holy will.

Is Christ the end of Law – Part 4

This is taken from Answers to Objections by F. D Nichol.

Paul states that the “ministration of death, written and engraved in stones” was “done away.” Therefore the ten-commandment law, which was written on the tables of stone, has been done away. (See 2 Cor. 15-11)

Let us see what Paul really did say. The introduction to the passage before us finds Paul declaring to the Corinthian brethren: “You are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men: forasmuch as you are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.” 2 Cor. 3:2, 3.

Here is the key to interpret the words that follow. His figure of speech is patently borrowed from the Scriptural contrast between the old and the new covenant, -Tables of stone- contrasted with “tables of the heart”, “ink” contrasted with “the Spirit of tile living God.” These Corinthians, he said, were “ministered by us.” By an easy transition Paul moves into a discussion of the two covenants by adding immediately that Christ “also hath made us able ministers of the new testament [covenant]; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter kills, but the spirit gives life.” (The word ‘testament’ in this and almost all other instances in the New Testament does not have the meaning of a “will as made by a
testator in anticipation of death, but of covenant, and is so translated in the Revised Version.)

We might close the discussion right here, for our examination of the two covenants revealed clearly that the ratifying of the new covenant did not mean the abolishing of the, Ten Commandments. However, let us proceed.

“But if the ministration of death, written and engraved in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: how shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more does the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excels. For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remains is glorious. Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: and not as Moses, which put a vale over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished.” Verses 7-13.

Here is a series of contrasts, intended not so much to belittle the old dispensation as to glorify  the new. It was ever Paul’s studied endeavor to prove that Christ and His ministry are the blazing glory beside which the spiritual glory of the former times seems pale. This argument by contrast particularly marks the book of Hebrews, which was written for the Jewish believers, who, until they accepted Christ, had thought that the glory of Sinai and the ministration of the divine law under the Jewish priests and rulers were the last word in heavenly glory. The contrasts that Paul seeks to make are essentially the same as the contrasts between the old and new covenants:

1. “The ministration of “death” versus ”the ministration of the spirit.”
2. “Ministration of condemnation” versus “ministration of righteousness.”
3. “Letter killes” versus -spirit gives life.”
4. “Was glorious- versus -exceed in glory.”
5. “Done away” versus “remains.”
Numbers one and two are simply variant expressions. The questions before its aie therefore:
1. What are these two ministrations?
2. What is meant by letter and spirit?
3. What is this relative “glory”?
4. What was “done away” and what “remains “?

The objector quickly answers: The “ministration of death” was that which was “written and  engraved in stones,” and is Plainly the Ten Commandments. But not so quickly. Is it correct to speak of a “ministration” and a “law” as synonymous? No. It is correct to speak of the “ministration” or, as we would say, the administering of a law. The administering of the law is the means by which it is put in operation, and is riot to be confused with the law itself. Therefore, “the ministration of death,” or “the ministration of condemnation,” refers to the ministration, or the administering, of the law that was “written and engraved in stones.” 

By a simple figure of speech the law is called death and condemnation. On a certain occasion in Elisha’s day the sons of the prophets gathered with him around a “great pot” in which had been cooked certain “wild gourds.” Evidently the gourds were poisonous, for one of those eating cried out: “There is death in the pot.” (See 2 Kings 1: 38-40) He meant, of course, that there was something in the Pot that would cause death, and substituting cause for effect, he cried out as he died. Paul had earlier said to the Corinthians, “The sting of death is sin: and the strength of sin is the law.” 1 Cor. 15:56. That is, if it were not for the law of God, which condemns those who violate it, there would be no sin, and hence no death in penalty for sin, “for where no law is, there is no transgression.- Rom. 4:15. Thinking on this fact and the contrasting fact that ”the law is holy . . . and
just, and good,” caused Paul to inquire: ”Was then that which is good made death unto me?” Here he speaks of the law as “death.” Now, how does Paul say that we escape from this “ministration of death”,- this “ministration of condemnation”? By abolishing the law of God? Listen to his words:

“There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not  after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of’ the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God  sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” Rom. 8: 1-4.

We escape from “condemnation” through Jesus Christ, who changes our hearts so that “the  righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us.” Paul describes this changed state as walking “after the Spirit,” and adds that “to be spiritually minded is life and peace.” Verses 5, 6. Here is a state of “condemnation” and “death” changed to one of “no condemnation” but rather “life.” In other words, a ministration of condemnation and death exchanged for a ministration of the spirit and life. How evident that we are here discussing tile two covenants. And how evident also that Paul’s words in Romans 8 parallel his words in 2 Corinthians 3. That is the plain teaching of the Scripture.
The cold letter of the law as it appeared on the stone tables had no life-giving power. It could only point accusingly at every man, for all have sinned and come short of tile glory of God. An administration of the law based on its letter alone results only in death for violators. But an administration of it based on the forgiveness possible through the action of God’s Spirit on the heart results in life. The contrast between “letter” and “spirit” does not mean a contrast between an age of law and an age of freedom from all law. As we have already noted, when God’s Spirit is in control, the law’s requirements are carried out in our hearts.

What, now, of the “glory” mentioned by Paul? He plainly speaks of the relative glory of two ministrations. The justice and righteousness of God shone forth in awesome, even terrifying glory on Mount Sinai as He proclaimed His law. He stood there as a consuming fire. But how much greater the glory of God that bathed the earth with its life-giving rays where Christ came down to “save his people from their sins.” Matt. 1:21. Here was the glory of justice and mercy combined, for in dying for our sins our “transgression of the law” Christ revealed how God at one and the same time could “be just, and the justifier of hint which believes in Jesus.” Rom. 3:26. This brings us to the last question: What was “done away” and what “remains”? The question is really already answered. The glory attendant upon the giving of the law is so greatly excelled by the glory attendant upon the saving of men from its violation that Paul could appropriately speak of the first as -glorious” and the second as “the glory that excels.” But right here Paul weaves in an  incident in connection with the giving of the law at Sinai to illustrate a point that he wishes to make in the verses that immediately follow this disputed passage. When Moses came down from the mount with the tables of stone in his hands, ”the skin of his face shone; and they were afraid to come nigh him.” So Moses “put a vale on his face- while he spoke to the Israelites. (See Ex. 34:29-35) Paul refers to this: “The children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away.” 2 Cor. 3:7. He refers to this again in verse 11, saying it was “done away,” and then again in verse 13 in these words: “And not as Moses, which put a vale over his face, that the children of Israel could riot steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished.” It was the glory of the former ministration, now ended, and not the law administered, that was “done away,” “abolished,” even, as by historical analogy, Paul reminds them that it was the glory on Moses’ face that was “done away.” The record declares that the veil was on Moses’ face, not on the tables of stone, that it was his face that shone and riot the tables of stone, and that it was the glory onhis face that faded, not the luster that ever surrounds the divinely written Ten Commandments.

Is Christ the end of Law – Part 3

Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; Eph 2:15

Paul is not talking about Ten Commandments here because doing so will be contradicting his own statement in Rom 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. The same Greek word καταργέω is translated as void in rom 3:31 and abolished in Eph 2:15. In rom 3:31 Paul writes that we don’t make the law void but we Establish it.

Also See Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.  1 cor 7 : 19. Paul makes a line of distinction between the law of Moses and Commandments of God here. He says keeping of the commandments of does matters.

In Rom 7: 22 He says that ” For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: “, verse 25 he say “So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God;” So Paul always served the Law of God.

But in Eph 2:15 He is speaking about the law of commandments contained in ordinances. The greek word used here as ordinances is δόγμα which means the ceremonies. Also see the word occurs only one more time in New testament. It is in Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; The ordinances here are the ceremonies (Drink offering, meat offering, Festival Sabbath)  which were type to the ministry of Christ see Col 2:17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

To know more on this see

Is Christ the end of Law – Part 2

Another passage which is commonly misunderstood and sometimes wrongly translated ( as in Tamil Bible) is Rom 7.

 Rom 7:4,6 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ;..But now we are delivered from the law,..

This is commonly used as a reason for teaching that we need not keep the Moral Law or Ten commandments. In Tamil Bible it is even translated as we are dead to the Law of God… and delivered from the Law of God.

But Paul is not talking about the Law of God in the Rom 7:1-6. He says we are delivered from the Law of sin and we are dead to the Law of sin.
For I delight in the law of Godafter the inward man: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to thelaw of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.Rom 7:22 – 25 Rom 8:1,2 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

Is Christ the end of Law – Part 1

For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. Romans 10:4

The translators of KJV were protestants who didn’t believe the difference between ceremonial Laws (which were shadow of Christ ministration) and the Moral Law (which is everlasting). So they translated the Greek word τέλος telos as  end in Rom 10:4 but the correct translation should be For Christ is the purpose or the focusof the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

See how the word telos is used in other verses

Now the endof the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: 1 Timothy 1:5

Receivingthe end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls. 1 Peter 1:9

..Ye have heard of the patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord.. James 5:11

just imagine if Christ is the end of Law as some people interpret and teach then I can commit adultery, fornication.

To be continued..