tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3422410239991902086.post6382175075520282953..comments2024-03-26T00:19:08.753-07:00Comments on The World's Ruined: Every Word Out of the Mouth of God...Jack Millerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18281378425270530573noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3422410239991902086.post-4172153014363220212015-06-02T16:37:24.053-07:002015-06-02T16:37:24.053-07:00Thanks for the continued discussion. I certainly a...Thanks for the continued discussion. I certainly agree that we want to find approval by our obedience. Indeed, I think God's command to Adam to "don't eat or die" suggests that finding approval by obedience is not a bad thing in itself. The problem we agree is that we disobey, and therefore cannot find approval except in the death of Christ. Even if the law (whichever covenant) should approve us in all but one thing, the one accusation demands our death. <br /><br />Jack, do you know the soundbite which says that Christ "satisfied law and justice"? What is the difference, if any, between law and justice? What does the soundbite mean? For some people , I think it means that active vicarious law-keeping satisfies the law and that the death of Christ satisfies justice. But it the death of Christ is not righteousness, and if the death of Christ is not demanded by the law, then why would we even need to be joined to Christ's death? Romans 6....<br /><br /><br /> On the one hand, I don’t want to be a distraction from the fundamental importance of the law-grace distinction by questioning “active obedience as vicarious law-keeping” (or by debating if there was a “covenant of works” with Adam.)<br /><br />On the other hand, a focus on obeying laws as the righteousness CAN imply that the death of Christ is not the righteousness. I don’t think active and positive should be split up, not only because the death was active and the obedience passive, but because I want to get away from any idea that the remission of sins is because of the death and that the positive blessing is because of the life.<br /><br />"Moral law" is found in that one law God gave Adam "Moral law" is found in the Noahic covenant and in the Abrahamic covenant. Christ perfectly obeyed all the laws revealed in all those covenants. The sacrifices of all those covenants pointed not to something merely practical and "natural" which could hold people together, but to the death of Christ, which would bring in righteousness for all His elect. Even the demand of the Noahic covenant for the death of killers was a religious command point to the need for Christ. Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06233995709579822605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3422410239991902086.post-84285678421083011002015-06-02T14:15:48.062-07:002015-06-02T14:15:48.062-07:00Interestingly, Paul writes that the gentiles' ...Interestingly, Paul writes that the gentiles' conscience bears witness to the law written in their hearts, <i>alternately accusing or else defending them.</i> So attached to that moral law written in their heart is the knowledge that certain works bring the accusation of condemnation, others approbation. This points to man as being naturally under a law-covenant of works. He is a law creature seeking to find approval through his works and avoid disapproval because of his misdeeds.Jack Millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18281378425270530573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3422410239991902086.post-87868609245820691412015-06-02T12:04:20.498-07:002015-06-02T12:04:20.498-07:00Did Jesus only redeem those who were under the Mos...Did Jesus only redeem those who were under the Mosaic Law?<br /><br />We can say that Adam was a gentile not under the Mosaic Law. Yet the moral law (which is summarized in the Decalogue) was written on his heart. Here's on spot that would point us to that conclusion.<br /><br />14 For when Gentiles who do not have the [Mosaic] Law do instinctively the things of the [Mosaic] Law, these, not having the [Mosaic] Law, are a <i>law</i> to themselves, 15 in that they<i> show the work of the Law <b>written in their hearts</b></i>, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, 16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.<br /><br />The law written in the gentiles hearts <i>showed</i> them what essentially what was the moral law found in the Mosaic. On that basis God can justly judge them because they know moral right and wrong.Jack Millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18281378425270530573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3422410239991902086.post-54694038206739721082015-06-02T11:17:39.243-07:002015-06-02T11:17:39.243-07:00the comparison between Adam and Christ is that the...the comparison between Adam and Christ is that the guilt of Adam's one act of disobedience is imputed to the elect and that the righteousness of Christ's one act of obedience is imputed to the elect. Adam and Christ were NOT born under the same law. Christ was born under the Mosaic law, but Adam was not. Christ came to die to win immortality for the elect. Adam was threatened with death for disobedience, but was never promised immortality no matter what he would ever do.<br /><br />1. Nobody but Adam was born under the law not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.<br /><br />2. Christ was not born under the law not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.<br /><br />3. After Adam sinned, even Adam was no longer able to keep the command not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Break it once, break it all forever, means that Adam no longer able to keep the law.<br /><br />4. Adam and those Adam represented were guilty and condemned to death because of his disobedience of the law not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.<br /><br />5. Adam did not represent Christ, so Christ was not even born under the guilt of Adam's sin, except as that sin was imputed to His elect, and Christ was imputed with all the sins of His elect.<br /><br />6. Christ was born the Mosaic law, under the Noahic law, and under the Abrahamic law.<br /><br /><br />https://markmcculley.wordpress.com/2012/06/17/was-the-physical-circumcision-of-christ-part-of-christs-righteousness/Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06233995709579822605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3422410239991902086.post-82670287009953555422015-06-01T20:57:35.408-07:002015-06-01T20:57:35.408-07:00My question was occasioned by your reference to ot...My question was occasioned by your reference to other law, to "moral law". That tends to be short hand for the Ten Commandments for some folks. James was writing after the giving of the Noahic, Abrahamic and Mosaic laws. So it's not clear to me that Adam was governed by those other laws, given after his sin.<br /><br />if indeed God only gave one law to Adam, for Adam to disobey that one law was for Adam to disobey all the law..<br /><br />I really am confused. Were you saying that Adam was under more than one law before Adam sinned? What do you mean by "moral law"? Are there some laws that God gives at times which are not moral?Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06233995709579822605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3422410239991902086.post-90517869466462334912015-06-01T13:26:07.173-07:002015-06-01T13:26:07.173-07:00Where is the Mosaic covenant/Decalogue in my post?...Where is the Mosaic covenant/Decalogue in my post? James says that to keep all the law and yet to disobey only one is to be guilty of all. The reason that's important is because it's biblical. (James 2:10).<br /><br />Likewise, your second paragraph doesn't represent my thinking. I more or less held the view above (parallel between Adam and Jesus) long before I became "confessional." Again, I understand it to be biblical.<br /><br />No qualms with your third paragraph.... one out of three!Jack Millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18281378425270530573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3422410239991902086.post-65405529484344007722015-06-01T12:43:04.657-07:002015-06-01T12:43:04.657-07:00I don't get way it's important to say that...I don't get way it's important to say that Adam's sin against God's law was a sin also against the laws later revealed in the Mosaic covenant (what you call "the moral law"). Certainly all God's laws are moral laws, and all of God's law speak not only to our actions but to our motives thoughts?<br /><br />I understand that you think it's important to have more than one law going on before sin, because you are committed confessionally to the possibility that righteous Adam might have obeyed more than one law for long enough to justly be rewarded with immortality, but even with Jesus, three days of not disobeying three laws does not amount to positively obeying all the laws for long enough, does it? <br /><br />The tree of life in the book of Revelation will come as a result of Christ's death as satisfaction of the law that was disobeyed by Adam for all of us. Adam's sin was for all of us, but Christ's death is only for all the elect, Dvine law now blesses the elect because Christ has satisfied divine law for the elect. God's curse on Christ blesses the elect. Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06233995709579822605noreply@blogger.com