Old Testament Relevance
Specifically, Isaiah...
The Bible consists of 66 books, in two parts-- the Cross at the fulcrum:
Curiously, Isaiah consists of 66 Chapters, in two parts-- The Captivity at the fulcrum:
Scofield had this to say about the Book of Isaiah...
If any Old Testament book can be said to contain the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ it is the Book of Isaiah, which is why it is often called the Old Testament Gospel, or the Gospel according to Isaiah.
I have recently been told that I should get out of the Old Testament; in effect, "out of the Law", and into the New, where the Grace of our Lord can be found. The Old, after all, is no longer relevant. We are under Grace now, not Law.
But I shouldn't have to point out that only Christians are under Grace. Everyone else is still under the Law and its ultimate judgment. We are not all under Grace, even though Grace is there for any who want it and earnestly seek it.
I've taken some criticism over my criticism of what passes for Christianity in some churches today... Many of today's churches... And hounded with questions that seem crafted for division more than honest debate. It is sad to see this day come; the church sullying itself in the ditches of Compromise in the name of Inclusiveness; when liberal philosophies have tainted the holy waters of God's message to the world, that Salvation is free for the asking, in repentance. But the liberal church is making far too many compromises to win anything more than the occasional soul... Lots of converts, but few souls. Some things are simply not negotiable.
Sexual impurity. Homosexuality. Pornography. Drug Use. Abortion... and the support of such. By sitting back, mouth shut, afraid to speak out against such we, in effect, support what is, in God's eye, non-negotiable.
But I'm stuck in the Old Testament. All... Alllllllll I do is judge and condemn, all the while insisting I am but the messenger. I am cold, heartless, and willing to consign everyone who doesn't believe as I do to the fiery pits of blackest hell. Because I am stuck in the Old Testament. The New is all about Love and Forgiveness. Yet those who cling to that tuft of grass conveniently forget the personal sacrifice our Lord made to bring about this new age of Love and Grace. It is the New Testament we are to follow now, the old has no relevance to today. Or does it?
Let's contrast the Old with the New in terms of where today's church is in relation to walking in the Truth and Light of God.
The bulk of today's church has fallen for a lie so beautifully wrapped in half-truths and distortions that even the elect have been deceived. Our shepherds have 'ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward' [Jude 11]; mega-churches that teach new mysticism for spirituality, and compromise in the name of tolerance and inclusiveness; because the Gospel is inclusive, right? Not entirely.
Please note the second word... 'If'. And the first word, second phrase... 'And'. These represent contingents, or requirements. 'If' this, 'And' that, then 'Thou shalt be'... The Gospel is inclusive, but Christianity is exclusive. The call to the marriage feast is inclusive, but the wedding garments are exclusive.
2 Corinthians 6:14-18 says,
The hymn says, "Just as I am... I come." And that's enough for a new start. God will take you as you are, wherever you are, however deep you are. But when he puts that new robe on you, and places that ring on your finger, and orders the fatted calf killed in celebration, He wants you to stay with Him, and not return to what you were. He has made you a new creature, "old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new." [2 Cor 5:17] Yet if you do stumble, you are still His son or daughter, all you need do is ask His forgiveness, dust yourself off, and continue moving away from what you were...
The new liberal church isn't interested in this brand of Christianity, however. Homosexuals can stay in committed loving relationships. Abortion-- while not the preferred choice --must remain an option for women who would choose that path; no sympathy for the unborn, but plenty for convicted killers on death row.
There is plenty of relevance in the Old Testament. After all, if there were no Old Testament would anyone believe the story of a man, born of a virgin, who was God in human flesh, who lived a sinless life, to die a substitutionary death for all of mankind, that anyone who believed on such a man would not have to answer for their sins after death and suffer an eternity in hell, but find forgiveness and an eternity in heaven with this same God-man?
The Bible consists of 66 books, in two parts-- the Cross at the fulcrum:
39 Books in the Old Testament, looking toward the Cross
27 Books in the New Testament, looking beyond the Cross
Curiously, Isaiah consists of 66 Chapters, in two parts-- The Captivity at the fulcrum:
39 Chapters looking toward the Captivites
27 Chapters looking beyond the Captivites
Scofield had this to say about the Book of Isaiah...
Nowhere else in the Scriptures written under the law have we so clear a view of grace. The New Testament Church does not appear, but Messiah in His Person and sufferings, and the blessing of the Gentiles through Him, are in full vision.
If any Old Testament book can be said to contain the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ it is the Book of Isaiah, which is why it is often called the Old Testament Gospel, or the Gospel according to Isaiah.
I have recently been told that I should get out of the Old Testament; in effect, "out of the Law", and into the New, where the Grace of our Lord can be found. The Old, after all, is no longer relevant. We are under Grace now, not Law.
But I shouldn't have to point out that only Christians are under Grace. Everyone else is still under the Law and its ultimate judgment. We are not all under Grace, even though Grace is there for any who want it and earnestly seek it.
I've taken some criticism over my criticism of what passes for Christianity in some churches today... Many of today's churches... And hounded with questions that seem crafted for division more than honest debate. It is sad to see this day come; the church sullying itself in the ditches of Compromise in the name of Inclusiveness; when liberal philosophies have tainted the holy waters of God's message to the world, that Salvation is free for the asking, in repentance. But the liberal church is making far too many compromises to win anything more than the occasional soul... Lots of converts, but few souls. Some things are simply not negotiable.
Sexual impurity. Homosexuality. Pornography. Drug Use. Abortion... and the support of such. By sitting back, mouth shut, afraid to speak out against such we, in effect, support what is, in God's eye, non-negotiable.
But I'm stuck in the Old Testament. All... Alllllllll I do is judge and condemn, all the while insisting I am but the messenger. I am cold, heartless, and willing to consign everyone who doesn't believe as I do to the fiery pits of blackest hell. Because I am stuck in the Old Testament. The New is all about Love and Forgiveness. Yet those who cling to that tuft of grass conveniently forget the personal sacrifice our Lord made to bring about this new age of Love and Grace. It is the New Testament we are to follow now, the old has no relevance to today. Or does it?
Let's contrast the Old with the New in terms of where today's church is in relation to walking in the Truth and Light of God.
The Lord GOD, which gathereth the outcasts of Israel saith, Yet will I gather others to him, beside those that are gathered unto him. All ye beasts of the field, come to devour, yea, all ye beasts in the forest. His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark; sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber. Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, every one for his gain, from his quarter. Come ye, say they, I will fetch wine, and we will fill ourselves with strong drink; and to morrow shall be as this day, and much more abundant.
--Isaiah 56:8-12
This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith. [...] For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
--2 Timothy 3:1-8, 4:3-4
The bulk of today's church has fallen for a lie so beautifully wrapped in half-truths and distortions that even the elect have been deceived. Our shepherds have 'ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward' [Jude 11]; mega-churches that teach new mysticism for spirituality, and compromise in the name of tolerance and inclusiveness; because the Gospel is inclusive, right? Not entirely.
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
--Romans 10:9
Please note the second word... 'If'. And the first word, second phrase... 'And'. These represent contingents, or requirements. 'If' this, 'And' that, then 'Thou shalt be'... The Gospel is inclusive, but Christianity is exclusive. The call to the marriage feast is inclusive, but the wedding garments are exclusive.
2 Corinthians 6:14-18 says,
Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? and what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? and what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.
The hymn says, "Just as I am... I come." And that's enough for a new start. God will take you as you are, wherever you are, however deep you are. But when he puts that new robe on you, and places that ring on your finger, and orders the fatted calf killed in celebration, He wants you to stay with Him, and not return to what you were. He has made you a new creature, "old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new." [2 Cor 5:17] Yet if you do stumble, you are still His son or daughter, all you need do is ask His forgiveness, dust yourself off, and continue moving away from what you were...
The new liberal church isn't interested in this brand of Christianity, however. Homosexuals can stay in committed loving relationships. Abortion-- while not the preferred choice --must remain an option for women who would choose that path; no sympathy for the unborn, but plenty for convicted killers on death row.
There is plenty of relevance in the Old Testament. After all, if there were no Old Testament would anyone believe the story of a man, born of a virgin, who was God in human flesh, who lived a sinless life, to die a substitutionary death for all of mankind, that anyone who believed on such a man would not have to answer for their sins after death and suffer an eternity in hell, but find forgiveness and an eternity in heaven with this same God-man?
from the mind of... Eric | 2:05 PM
20 Comments:
"It is the New Testament we are to follow now, the old has no relevance to today."
I don't know that I've seen ANY of those you like to call "liberal" suggesting that the OT is irrelevant. I, for one, LOVE the OT - and I'm with you on Isaiah - it's a great representation of God's Love and Justice.
The OT is extremely relevant in many ways. It gives us a great history of a people who sometimes got it and sometimes didn't - just like us.
It's not to be taken literally, word for word, but Lord, please let us pay close attention to it and learn from its pages.
Isaiah came by way of Luke to our services this morning at my horrid liberal church. Repentance, even, which, note, is about *doing* than than *not doing.*
"He (john) went all through the country around the Jordan River preaching a baptism of life-change leading to forgiveness of sins, as described in the words of Isaiah the prophet:
Thunder in the desert!
"Prepare God's arrival!
Make the road smooth and straight!
Every ditch will be filled in,
Every bump smoothed out,
The detours straightened out,
All the ruts paved over.
Everyone will be there to see
The parade of God's salvation."
When crowds of people came out for baptism because it was the popular thing to do, John exploded: "Brood of snakes! What do you think you're doing slithering down here to the river? Do you think a little water on your snakeskins is going to deflect God's judgment?
It's your life that must change, not your skin. And don't think you can pull rank by claiming Abraham as 'father.' Being a child of Abraham is neither here nor there—children of Abraham are a dime a dozen. God can make children from stones if he wants.
What counts is your life. Is it green and blossoming? Because if it's deadwood, it goes on the fire."
The crowd asked him, "Then what are we supposed to do?"
"If you have two coats, give one away," he said. "Do the same with your food."
Tax men also came to be baptized and said, "Teacher, what should we do?"
He told them, "No more extortion—collect only what is required by law."
Soldiers asked him, "And what should we do?"
He told them, "No shakedowns, no blackmail—and be content with your rations."
It'd The Message, and I know you prefer KJV. But I like it.
"Why do we prefer illusions to reality and nostalgia to imagination?" we all prayed in the Prayer Confession.
Why, indeed?
Oh, and as I must, I point out that you have listed homosexuality, which is a state of being, among actions. Apples and oranges.
And, of course, as long as you read the Bible as if it were written by the hand of God Himself, to us, today, we will always differ. And that's OK.
Really excellent, EL!
Eric,
Well said with Scripture doing the speaking!
Liberals misunderstand the meaning of grace. Grace and forgiveness is available to all who will come to Him humbly and in repentance for their sin. One who comes to Christ for salvation, but is unwilling to forsake their sin, cannot receive what they are seeking. Jesus doesn't sell fire insurance. It is a mockery and insult to what He did on the cross to assume that one can receive salvation while unwilling to give up their sin.
The Old Testament is just as important as the New Testament, in that it came from the mouth of God and points to our need for Christ. There is no passage of Scripture that is not important. Jesus did say "...Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."
"O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?"
Eric did. Today.
"It's not to be taken literally, word for word..."
That just about sums it up.
And it's a perfect example of the point EL was making.
It's just a history book, y'all. Nothing more. Just like Jesus was just a good person...nothing more.
It's not even a history book.
And this what Jesus said to somone who called him good: "Why callest thou me good? There is none good, but God in heaven."
Just tears y'all up to have to think about this stuff. It's sacred Scripture, bequeathed by our forefathers and -mothers in the faith, to us, their spiritual descendants, God's highest order of Creation, with heads to use as well as hearts. Anyone who relies on one to the exclusion to the other gets confused.
To read the Bible literally is idolatry. To insist that all Christians have to read it literally is to lead people away from God, not TO God.
The only people confused here, friend, appears to be you and Dan. No one here is an idolator, if idolatry is found anywhere it's in your own heart, trusting in your own logic, and the words of men who have led you and unknown others astray.
Jesus said 'every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God...' Jesus Himself called the Old Testament and the words of the Prophets the 'Word of God'.
Believing the Bible is the inspired-- God-breathed --infallible word of the living God, flies in the face of your own brand of idolatry, you're trusting in your own gods; of intellect and logic. But the God of the universe defies mens intellect and logic. He is infinitely greater and more complex than mens intellect and logic. You're trusting in yourself. Not God.
No one here is worshipping the Bible; to wield a sword in heated battle is not evidence of 'sword-worship'. What I and many others like me do is use the bible as the tool God intended, in season and out of season, to preach the truth to a dying world, that need not slip into infinity without the seal of God upon their hearts.
You, Dan and others often try to thwart that message. Why should I continue to allow it? Because I'm fair-minded? I want commenters? No. I want converts, but it's beginning to look as though I'm continually shooting myself in the foot. What kind of messenger allows his message to be trodden underfoot? I'm beginning to ask myself that very same question.
But in the spirit of reconciliation, I invite you to do as Jesus suggested... "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." --John 5:39
"Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent." --Rev 2:5
I invite you to return to your first love.
this is one of the most powerful posts i've read in awhile. i, too, am an old testament christian.
many christians do not know it will be very close to how we live in eternity. the ending to every minor prophet shows the promise of this to be true.
isaiah is definitely THE best book in the entire bible as far as i'm concerned.
you are to be commended.
A rare direct, frontal assault on a supposed infidel. Bravo, EL.
I've never, ever left my first love, EL. I've left an interloper that got *between* me and my first love for awhile.
But that's enough. Your way is the same Way I'm on, whether you see that or not. And this has gotten tiring, hasn't it? You can't convert those who already believe-trust-rely on Jesus -- and to insist on converting anyone to your own narrow view is, in fact, sacrilegious. So, no thanks.
Your liberal brothers and sisters love you just the way you are, most of them -- and we invite you to extrend us thge right-hand of Christian fellowship.
Ha. You won't.
"What kind of messenger allows his message to be trodden underfoot?"
"Vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord."
I told an honest god-hater earlier that he should be wary of God's judgement as he mocks the creator he rejects. Dan and ER should be wary as well.
ER:
I want to believe this, that we are on the same path, it is my sincerest hope that we are, but if my view is narrow, it's because the road is narrow, and 'few there be that find it' [Mat 7:14]. Everyone is welcome, but God has placed standards on the lives of those who accept that narrow road. He also know's we're prone to falling-- He's seen it time and again from the very beginning --and has promised to help us get back up.
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." --1 John 1:9
--
The reason it took so long to approve your comment was because I needed to know how to respond. I had to wait for the right words. To have simply rattled something off would have done the message a great injustice first and foremost.
OK, EL. I apologize for thinking you to have been unfair, when you never had before. Peace. :-)
BTW, EL, re: "I want to believe this, that we are on the same path, it is my sincerest hope that we are ..."
I have the same hopes for yourself! But every time you act like anything you do whatsoever to be saved -- even, "accepting" God's grace, even your favorite "if you shall confess with thy mouth then ... verse -- it makes me wonder.
If you confess with your mouth is NOT a limitation on who will be saved; it's an indication, but neither a guarantee nor a proof, than one is saved!
Salvation is not a transaction. There is no if ... then. There is no quid pro quo.
The only response to God's grace is to surrender to it -- for yourself.
And to let God worry about how, exactly, others respond to it!
We are told not to judge for one reason: Because we are incapable of judging, and for us to do so is playing God. Which is idolatry. Of self.
"Salvation is not a transaction."
Ahhh, but it is, ER... We are bought with a price, that price being the blood of our saviour Jesus Christ.
With time now to expound further...
Perhaps you should have said 'the only wise response to God's grace is to surrender to it...' there are certainly other possible responses... but I'm being nit-picky.
Neither would I personally ascribe "worry" to a being so far above and beyond worry, which is a fear-based emotion, and what does God honestly fear? He asks us to bring His word to the peoples of the world-- those we can personally reach --to include those who live next door and down the street... or at the other end of an internet connection. But you are right in this: It is not my place to worry about how others respond to His message... I'm merely a sower of seed, it is God who either makes my efforts to lie dead in the earth or grow to produce more fruit in kind, in the fullness of time.
But we must judge, ER, if we are to abstain from even the appearance of evil. Not condemn, but judge what is and is not acceptable for ourselves, our families, children. Furthermore, if we are to heed the verse that says to lovingly restore our brethren to fellowship, this necessarily requires we make a judgment-- that our brother or sister has done or acted in a way inconsistent with their walk with Christ. We must make judgments, but judgments based only on the standards God has layed out for us. If our brother has sinned against us, and Jesus has said we must forgive him as many as seven times seventy, it then follows that in order to recognize our brothers sin we must first make a judgment. A judgment... Not a condemnation.
This is hardly idolatry.
Scripture References for previous comment:
Abstaining from the appearance of evil
Restoring our brethren who have fallen
Until seventy times seven
"Salvation is not a transaction."
Ahhh, but it is, ER... We are bought with a price, that price being the blood of our saviour Jesus Christ.
BUT WE ARE THE ONE BEING BOUGHT. We are not the "other" in the transaction. God is on both sides of the deal.
On restoring brothers, etc.: I'm not even a literalist but it's clear to me that that section of Scripture is talking about local groups of believers -- not one group judging another, and not one believer from one group, or congregation if you will, judging the members of another group.
Furthermore, the section obviously is talking about behavior, not about the state of one's soul.
My Responsibility to brothers in Christ is not any different than my responsibility toward unbelievers. In the sense that they are both my neighbors the state of their soul is irrelevant in that I am commanded to be a good neighbor to both. I am to love both as I love myself. So, warning believers they are slipping away from the faith is no different than warning the ungodly of all their ungodly ways... Ways that will lead them to Hell.
On your other point, Is a brother from another congregation truly not subject to criticism and appeals to repent from fellow believers NOT of his congregation? He is still my brother! No matter where he lives or where he worships!
Should we not have written Jim Bakker before his fall? Even though he lived and worked hundreds of miles away? He is still our brother. Should we not now accept Bakker back into our fellowship since his chastisment and repentance?
As to your objections on this, I admit I'm confused. Why should this be a bone of contention on top of everything else?
----
Click here for a look at what Jim Bakker is doing today. (blog link... not main site)
Re, "Is a brother from another congregation truly not subject to criticism and appeals to repent from fellow believers NOT of his congregation? He is still my brother! No matter where he lives or where he worships!"
Perhaps. But you can't base that assertion on the verses you cite, not if you take the Bible literally. And not if you don't actually.
Which raises an underlying point of our disagreement: You don't take the Bible as literally as you say you do; you take it as literally, more or less, as you want to.
Quick: Which of the two or three sets of Ten Commandments in the O.T. is the real one? :-) :-)
Post a Comment
<< Home