Maybe you said that in the Covenant threads. I don’t remember you saying this in this thread.


I disagree. The law was given before the health laws and tithing.


No. Differently from what the rabbies taught, according to the written law the person didn’t become unclean for coming in contact with unclean animals. Interestingly, those who should venture to eat unclean meat would make themselves abominable and there was no cleansing ritual by which they could become clean again.


According to this view, Abraham established the practice and God liked the idea and adopted it into the OC. Is this what you are saying?


Nothing was written before Sinai – neither the clean/unclean laws, nor the tithing law, nor the 10-commandment law, nor any other law. This doesn’t mean these laws didn’t exist. The Bible says:

Genesis 26:5 "because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws."

Rom. 5: 12-14 “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned—— (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.” [There must therefore have been a law during that period, because sin was then imputed]


I hate to admit it? How did you come to this conclusion?
Nobody was ever saved by the old covenant, and nobody was ever saved by keeping the 10 commandments, either under the old covenant or under the new. We are saved by Christ’s keeping of the law, and by His experiencing of its curse in our place.


If you remember, the chapter about Noah doesn’t specify which animals are clean and which are unclean. (This law, by the way, was given not to Noah, but to Adam, since only sacrifices of clean animals should be offered.)


Scott, our disagreement has to do with Eph. 2:15, which speaks about a law which was abolished on the cross. This law can’t be the 10-commandment law because Rom. 3:31 says that that law wasn’t abolished on the cross. Either it was abolished or it wasn’t – it can’t be both! So either these verses are speaking about two different laws or Paul contradicted himself. Which is it?

Who is under the law? Who is subject to the law? What do these terms mean? Where in the Bible or the SOP is it explained? In what sense was Jesus under the law?

Galatians
4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,

Here's a little something about "under the law" from "The Glad Tidings" (by E. J. Waggoner)

Christ being born "under the law" is in reference to His incarnation into the human race. Becoming a man was a death sentence. Only one group of humans will get out of this mess alive and Jesus wasn't one of them. The rest are subject to death because of Adam's choice to sin.

Also Jesus was born under the literal OC because He was born a Jew. Christ had to keep the law perfectly and defeat Satan in order to conquer him and earn the right to be the representative of the human race. Had Christ sinned Satan would be the rightful ruler of humanity and Christ would have lost His claim on us.

scott

I agree with Brother Waggoner. However, the phrase "under the law" seems to mean different things depending on the context. What does it mean in the following different passages?

Romans
3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
6:15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

1 Corinthians
9:20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;
9:21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.

Galatians
3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed [is] every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
3:11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, [it is] evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
3:12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
3:13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed [is] every one that hangeth on a tree:
3:14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

3:23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster [to bring us] unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
4:5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
4:21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?

5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

There is full assurance of hope in believing every word of Christ, believing in Him, being united to Him by living faith. When this is his experience, the human being is no longer under the law, for the law no longer condemns his course of action. {HP 144.4}

Our heavenly Father designed to prove and test the professed faith and obedience of his people. The sacrifices which they performed under the law were typical of the Lamb of God, and illustrated his great atonement. Yet the Jewish nation were so blinded and deceived by Satan that when Christ came, whom their sacrifices and offerings had been prefiguring, they would not receive him. They led him as a lamb to the slaughter. {4aSG 118.1}

Scott, I appreciated what you wrote. I agree. By living and dying the perfect life and death Jesus earned the right to own our sin and second death. He also earned the right to serve as our ruler and representative.

Waggoner wrote that "under the law" mean "under the condemnation of the law" except for one time (I don't recall the passage right now; it's in Romans somewhere, I remember that) where he said it was mistranslated from the Greek. ("hupo," as I recall, means "under," and some other preposition was used, which he said she be translated "in" was used, so the passage was incorrectly translated "under the law" instead of "in the law").

Here's something you might find interesting. Waggoner used Gal. 4:4 to prove that Christ took fallen flesh. He argued that "under the law" could not mean "subject to the law" here because Paul wrote that Christ came "under the law" to save those who were "under the law." Only the Jews were subject to the law. But all were under the condemnation of the law. So Christ was born "under the law" meaning that He was born to be sin for us, which meant taking our sinful nature and bearing our sin.

What does "under the law to Christ" mean?

Does "under the law" ever mean under obligation to live in harmony with the principles of the law?

I don't see that this phrase exists anywhere except here in your question.



Not in Scripture. Of course, that doesn't mean the principle isn't true; it is. It just not expressed by Paul in the words translated "under the law."

Hi MM,

Thanks! In the Christus Victor model there is a war between God and Satan and Christ comes and defeats our enemies for us. We become victors “in Christ” which is similar to David killing the giant and all of Israel claiming the victory. David represented Israel!

This view was the primary view as far back as 120 AD along with the idea that the war was over God’s character.

I used to think that the Great Controversy view was relatively new, but the more I study the more I find that we bring little to the table. The Apostles had the truth in its fullness.

Many claim that the penal view of the atonement comes from Paul, but the church was not aware of it until the 12th century. There is no record of it anyway!

scott