I know you acknowledged it, but lemme post it one more time:

Matthew 5:



Look at that again. It says NOTHING of limiting your kindness and charity and care to people who are repentant. Jesus says openly that we mustn't make those distinctions, THAT WE MAY BE THE CHILDREN OF YOUR FATHER IN HEAVEN. Does that sound like someone that would mock people in their misery?

"For if you love them which love you, what reward have you, do not even the publicans the same?"

Jesus is telling us to be perfect AS OUR FATHER IN HEAVEN is perfect. Until I am convinced otherwise, I am going to assume Jesus is talking about God. That isn't the description of a God that turns his back on people in their time of tragedy because He's been slighted, nor is it the character of a being that would order the slaughter of innocent children because their parents worship other Gods.

You can flail around all you want, and claim perfect continuity between the Old and New Testament, but that section there damns any such argument. The OT perception of God was a creator that spared those that towed the line and discounted the lives and suffering of those who didn't. The Old Testament God is not this God. Period.

You are being brainwashed by political propaganda, thousands of years old, that was intended to excuse the invasion of a place and the liquidation of cultures. To me, that is bearing false witness against God Himself.

I heard this message from John Macarthur it and it was extremely legalistic and moralistic. What is moralism? Moralism is legalism taken outside of the Church (our leading export, it seems). It judges others solely based on specific behaviors (particularly sexual mores), much like the Pharisees judged others. It typically condemns rather than reaches out. It expects unbelievers to act as righteous as believers (or even more so). In addition to the tendency of feeding self-righteousness, one of the key dangers of moralism is that it can cause us to miss the bigger picture.
As Christians, by not deeply believing the Gospel and trying to earn God’s acceptance, individually or as a nation, in our daily lives is the main cause of fear and pride in our hearts (moralism and legalism)because we act on the idea of “I obey therefore I am accepted” (religion) rather than “I am accepted so I obey” (Gospel).
Did anyone feel set free by this message? Did it liberate you like the Gospel does or did it make you feel like you needed to do some sin management and work really hard to please God or He would punish us? Freedom is the Gospel (Jesus) the other one is religion (Pharisees).
Here is something from Desiring God and John Piper on the Gospel vs. Moralism from the 2006 Desiring God Conference
Tim Keller on the Gospel:
The gospel is: you are more sinful and flawed than you ever dared believe yet you can be more accepted and loved than you ever dared hope at the same time because Jesus Christ lived and died in your place. . . .
“True faith saith not: ‘What have I done? . . . What do I deserve?’ But it saith: ‘what hath Christ done? What doth he deserve?’ . . . Therefore he that apprehendeth Christ by faith . . . may be bold to glory that he is righteous. How? Even by that precious jewel, Christ Jesus, which he possesseth by faith.” (Martin Luther, Commentary on Galatians)
Irreligious people seek to be their own saviors and lords through irreligion, “worldly” pride. (“No one tells me how to live or what to do, so I determine what is right and wrong for me!”) But moral and religious people seek to be their own saviors and lords through religion, “religious” pride. . . . Both irreligion and religion are forms of self salvation.
To “get the gospel” is to turn from self-justification and rely on Jesus’ record for a relationship with God. The irreligious don’t repent at all, and the religious only repent of sins. But Christians also repent of their righteousness. That is the distinction between the three groups—Christians, moralists (religious), and pragmatists (irreligious).
“Lay your deadly doing down, down at Jesus’ feet.
Stand in Him, in Him alone—gloriously complete.” (Unknown)
(Partnership, June 1996: “Redeemer: The Centrality of the Gospel”)

Really enjoyed that reply. Repenting of one's righteousness... what a cool way of saying it.

For some really good sermons check out the guy that wrote that: Dr. Timothy Keller at Redeemer Presbyterian Church in NYC. This is no ordinary church and no ordinary preacher...sorry Dr. Macarthur.

The sermon following 9-11 is exellent. Not the normal doom and gloom and blaming someone's sin on the attack. Very Gospel oriented.

http://sermons.redeemer.com/store/index.cfm?fuseaction=category.display&category_ID=11&CFID=944663&CFTOKEN=70148901

BAKERSTREET POSTS:


I hope you can see after reading my explanation in reply # 34, that, according to Romans 13, I think we should oppose, as best we can, all forms of governmental authority if their actions and policies are “a terror to good”.

I don't see this as a self defeating conflict....

You brought up that the nation is Caesar's junk this referring ‘Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s.' Here, our Lord is speaking to us about becoming ensnared in competing loyalties and forget that kingship belongs to God omnipotent. Men rule at God's pleasure. "you would have no power...unless it had been given you from above." St.Jn 19:11. The only way to look at this is that Jesus Christ is King and men are blessed to share in His authority. Men defeat themselves when they don't follow this formula...and that of the Sermon on the Mount as well!

See I don't think the legalizaton of abortion and acceptance of homosexuality are strictly political issues and therefore a matter for Caesar alone. Whether opposing the culture of death or any tyranny of the political order, I give my first allegiance to God. Secular humanists and the libertines hate this saying religious types like me and KFC should keep out of the public square crying Church and State. We are saying that when Ceaser's laws are an abomination before Almighty God, then it is Caesar who must change....(KFC is saying if we don't change, then God's wrath, that is some kind of judgment upon us will ultimately follow. I agree.)

I'm sorry to be so dense, but I don't know what that means.

Perhaps a definition of 'righteousness' is in order.



Ditto with "Self-justification". What is it? I may do it and don't even know!



What else are you suggesting we repent of other than sins?

Here is something from Desiring God and John Piper on the Gospel vs. Moralism from the 2006 Desiring God ConferenceTim Keller on the Gospel:The gospel is: you are more sinful and flawed than you ever dared believe yet you can be more accepted and loved than you ever dared hope at the same time because Jesus Christ lived and died in your place. . . .“True faith saith not: ‘What have I done? . . . What do I deserve?’ But it saith: ‘what hath Christ done? What doth he deserve?’ . . . Therefore he that apprehendeth Christ by faith . . . may be bold to glory that he is righteous. How? Even by that precious jewel, Christ Jesus, which he possesseth by faith.” (Martin Luther, Commentary on Galatians)

EXACTLY. Yes. I believe this.

Really enjoyed that reply

You did? Well did you notice she said......

True faith saith not: ‘What have I done? . . . What do I deserve?’ But it saith: ‘what hath Christ done? What doth he deserve?’ . . . Therefore he that apprehendeth Christ by faith . . . may be bold to glory that he is righteous. How? Even by that precious jewel, Christ Jesus, which he possesseth by faith.”

I've been saying the same thing repeatedly. It's ok to say one is righteous....but not of oneself.....I am found righteous not because of what I've done, but all because of what he's done for me. But if I dare say it around here Baker, you call me a Pharisee or *gasp* the hate monger ........Phelps. Now ......you said this:

Jesus is telling us to be perfect AS OUR FATHER IN HEAVEN is perfect. Until I am convinced otherwise, I am going to assume Jesus is talking about God. That isn't the description of a God that turns his back on people in their time of tragedy because He's been slighted, nor is it the character of a being that would order the slaughter of innocent children because their parents worship other Gods.

Well then you've chosen to NOT believe in the whole counsel of God, picking and choosing what you wish to believe. Ok, so how do you know Matthew 5 represents the true God and not some of the OT scripture that you choose not to believe? What are you going on here? Also, if you believe what Jesus said in Matthew 5 why don't you believe the other things that Jesus said when he quoted the OT?

As I said, He's talking about our attitude. We are to love our enemy? How do we do that? It's not the warm fuzzies he's talking but to love by doing (Good Samaritan is the example). This whole section as I said is all about being willing to suffer for another....even our enemy if it's applicable. Also we are to be salt and light and what does salt and light do? But this in no way says God is not going to bring judgment to our enemies. Do you see that here? He just doesn't want us to take vengeance in our own hands because there's a better way. Love them to Christ if they are willing to come. Our lives are the only Jesus they may ever see or the only bible they may ever read.

How do we become perfect Baker? I agree that we need to be perfect as the father is perfect. Agree. But the only way we can be perfect....is CHRIST IN US and the only way we can do that is to LEAVE the world behind by turning in the opposite direction. For those who don't they will be the ones God doesn't hear. Paul said this:

"To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles which is CHRIST IN YOU, the hope in glory: Whom we preach warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus." Col 1:27-18

We can only be perfect one way. That is by him as Ignat said. John MacArthur says the same thing. He says nothing different. He would agree with the statement by Ignat as well. John Piper is excellent and I know MacArthur's quoted him before.

As far as preaching love and not God's justice, there are preachers that preach both. There was a huge revival maybe even the largest ever when John Edwards preached his "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" message. Thousands came to Christ and the message was more fire and brimstone than love. Some respond to that and some respond to "God is Love" messages. Right now Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron (Growing Pains) have a successful ministry preaching that mankind is very sick and need of a cure. They say we are so busy preaching the cure it's falling on deaf ears because people don't realize they have a sin sickness. Nobody cares about a cancer cure until they find out they have cancer. It's the same with the spiritual. So the preachers of today are preaching heavy on grace and very light (if at all) on law and are not getting through.

"Hell's Best Kept Secret" by Ray Comfort is probably one of the best I've ever heard........and it definitely makes one think. You can hear it here:

Link

But Christians also repent of their righteousness. To “get the gospel” is to turn from self-justification I'm sorry to be so dense, but I don't know what that means. Perhaps a definition of 'righteousness' is in order.To “get the gospel” is to turn from self-justification

I don't get this either. "Christians" are declared righteous at the moment they believe.....(Romans 4:3)

To be righteous is to be right with God. How and why would we want to "repent" of that? Doesn't make sense.

Now if they are talking "self righteousness then that is a sin....period and stems from pride. We are to repent for that so maybe that's what's meant here?

The OT perception of God was a creator that spared those that towed the line and discounted the lives and suffering of those who didn't. The Old Testament God is not this God. Period.

The OT perception of God is NOT diff than the NT perception of God.

You say I'm being brainwashed? Well then why do I get the feeling you're following the doctrine of Marcion? Maybe you're being influenced by him? He pointed out this same thing as you do and then set about to remove from the NT any influences from the Jewish Creator God because the Creator God was evil. He ended up getting rid of most of the gospels btw in his version of scripture.

The reality is there is NO diff between the images of God presented in the OT and NT. The NT writers saw a similar continuity between the OT God and the God they experienced thru Jesus.

There is Love in the OT
There is Judgment in the NT
The main diff is a diff between judgment within history and judgment at the end of history.

There is love in the OT. God does NOT present himself first and foremost as a God of Judgment but a God of Love. He said this way back in Exodus 34:6-7:

And as he passed in front of Moses proclaiming, "The LORD the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger abounding in LOVE and faithfulness, maintaining Love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation."

This is God presenting himself to Moses. Notice how he first states his compassion, forgiveness, faithfulness etc. He then notes this is not to be taken advantage of. Those who do not respond to his love will not escape. He is loving but is not an indulgent parent. He as a perfect God will bring justice.

Both Testaments reveal a God of love who is also a God of justice. He offers his love and forgiveness urging us to repent and escape the terrible and eternal judgments at the end of history. Jesus came as the lamb the first time and will come as the Lion of Judah the next.

Do a word count on judge or judgment sometime in the NT. In the NIV it comes up with 108 verses. Guess who speaks of this more than any other? Jesus. Yes, the same Jesus who spoke the wonderful words of Matthew 5 that you quoted yourself.

And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

So if you don't believe God is going to turn his back on anyone.....then who exactly is the one that's going to hell Baker?

Here is an explanation of "repenting of our righteousness." This is basically looking at the sin underneath all of our sins. Why do we do the things that are good? Why should we live a good moral life? The Pharisees did. Then why did Jesus blast them and tell the people that "I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners" (Matt 9;13)


The gospel is: “I am accepted through Christ, therefore I obey.” Religion is: “Iobey, therefore I am accepted.” So the gospel differs from both religion and irreligion.

• You can seek to be your own “lord and savior” by breaking the law of God. But you can also do so by keeping the law in order to earn your Salvation or trying to earn favor with God…blessings… a good life etc.

• Disbelief in the gospel of grace, of course, keeps the unconverted from God. But a lack of deep belief in the gospel is also the main cause of spiritual deadness, fear, and pride in Christians, because our hearts continue to act on the basis of “I obey, therefore I am accepted.”

Our failure to forgive others is not simply a lack of obedience, but afailure to believe we are saved by grace, too.

Our lying in order to cover up a mistake is not simply a lack of obedience, but a failure to find our acceptance in God rather than in
human approval.

• So we do not “get saved” by believing the gospel and then “grow” by trying hard to live according to Biblical principles. Believing the gospel is not only the way to meet God, but also the way to grow into him.

It is important to consider how the gospel affects and transforms the very act of repentance. In religion, the purpose of repentance is basically to keep God happy so he will continue to bless you and answer your prayers. This means that “religious repentance” is selfish, self-righteous, and bitter all the way to the bottom.

Religious repentance is selfish. In religion we are sorry for sin mainly because of its consequences to us. It will bring us punishment and we want to avoid that. So we repent.

• The gospel tells us that sin can’t ultimately bring us into condemnation (Rom 8:1). Its heinousness is therefore what it does to God; it displeases and dishonors him.

• Thus in religion, repentance is self-centered; the gospel makes it Godcentered. In religion, we are mainly sorry for the consequences of sin, but in the gospel we are sorry for the sin itself.

Religious repentance is self-righteous. The repentance easily becomes a form of atoning for the sin. Religious repentance often becomes a form of self-flagellation in which we convince God (and ourselves) that we are so truly miserable and regretful that we deserve to be forgiven.

• In the gospel, however, we know that Jesus suffered and was miserable for our sin. We do not make ourselves suffer in order to merit forgiveness. We simply receive the forgiveness earned by Christ.

• 1 John 1:8 says that God forgives us because he is “just.” This is a remarkable statement. It would be unjust of God now to ever deny us forgiveness, because Jesus earned our acceptance!

• In religion, we are earning our forgiveness with our repentance, but in the gospel we are just receiving it.

Religious repentance is bitter all the way down. In religion, our only hope is to live a good enough life for God to bless us. Therefore every instance of sin and repentance is traumatic, unnatural and horribly threatening.

• Only under great duress does a religious person admit they have sinned because their only hope is their moral goodness.

• But in the gospel, the knowledge of our acceptance in Christ makes it easier to admit we are flawed because we know we won’t be cast off if we confess the true depths of our sinfulness.

Our hope is in Christ’s righteousness, not our own, so it is not so traumatic to admit our weaknesses and lapses.

Here are two quotes to chew on as well. The first from Martin Luther on righteousness and one from Richard Lovelace.

There is a righteousness which Paul calls “the righteousness of faith.” God
imputes it to us apart from our works — in other words, it is passive
righteousness… So then, have we nothing to do to obtain this righteousness?
No, nothing at all! For this righteousness comes by doing nothing, hearing
nothing, knowing nothing, but rather in knowing and believing this only — that
Christ has gone to the right hand of the Father, not to become our judge, but to
become for us our wisdom, our righteousness, our holiness, our salvation! Now
God sees no sin in us, for in this heavenly righteousness sin has no place. So
now we may certainly think, “Although I still sin, I don’t despair, because Christ
lives, who is both my righteousness and my eternal life.” In that righteousness
I have no sin, no fear, no guilty conscience, no fear of death. I am indeed a
sinner in this life of mine and in my own righteousness, but I have another life,
another righteousness above this life, which is in Christ, the Son of God.
Christians never completely understand [this] themselves, and thus do not take
advantage of it when they are troubled and tempted. So we have to constantly
teach it, repeat it, and work it out in practice. Anyone who does not understand
this righteousness or cherish it in the heart and conscience will continually be
buffeted by fears and depression. Nothing gives peace like this passive
righteousness. The troubled conscience has no cure for its desperation and
feeling of unworthiness unless it takes hold of the forgiveness of sins by grace,
offered free of charge in Jesus Christ, which is this passive or Christian
righteousness… Once you are in Christ, the Law is the greatest guide for your
life, but until you have Christian righteousness, all the law can do is to show
you how sinful and condemned you are. But if we first receive Christian
righteousness, then we can use the law, not for our salvation, but for his honor
and glory, and to lovingly show our gratitude.
– Martin Luther


Only a fraction of the present body of professing Christians are solidly
appropriating the justifying work of Christ in their lives… Many… have a
theoretical commitment to this doctrine, but in their day-to-day existence they
rely on their sanctification for their justification… drawing their assurance of
acceptance with God from their sincerity, their past experience of conversion,
their recent religious performance or the relative infrequency of their conscious,
willful disobedience.

Few know enough to start each day with a thoroughgoing
stand upon the Gospel of Jesus Christ: you are accepted, looking outward in faith and
claiming the wholly alien righteousness of Christ as the only ground for
acceptance, relaxing in that quality of trust which will produce increasing
sanctification as faith is active in love and gratitude… Much that we have
interpreted as a defect of sanctification in church people is really an outgrowth
of their loss of bearing with respect to justification. Christians who are no
longer sure that God loves and accepts them in Jesus, apart from their present
spiritual achievements, are subconsciously radically insecure persons… Their
insecurity shows itself in pride, a fierce, defensive assertion of their own
righteousness, and defensive criticism of others. They come naturally to hate
other cultural styles and other races, the "sinners" in society in order to bolster their
own security anddischarge their suppressed anger.
– Richard Lovelace

So if we are justified and sanctified and made righteous by Christ and we believe in Him for our righteous standing...How can God Abandon America?

Is Macarthur saying that all we need to do as a nation is stop doing all these "bad things" then God will be happy and bless us again?

Here is the real issue with the whole sermon on "Has God Abandoned America?" It is driving us to be self-righteous and earn favor from God. This line of thought is driving us to be moralists and depend on our deeds to please God.

Moralists and religious people seek to be their own saviors and lords through religion, “religious” pride. (”I am more moral and spiritual than other people, so God owes me to listen to my prayers and take me to heaven. God cannot let just anything happen to me–he owes me a happy life. I’ve earned it!”).

But Christians are those who have adopted a whole new system of approach to God. They may have had both religious phases and irreligious phases in their lives. But they have come to see that their entire reason for both their irreligion and their religion was essentially the same and essentially wrong!

Christians come to see that both their sins and their best deeds have all really been ways of avoiding Jesus as savior (self-righteousness) They come to see that Christianity is not fundamentally an invitation to get more religious. A Christian comes to say: “though I have often failed to obey the moral law, the deeper problem was why I was trying to obey it! Even my efforts to obey it has been just a way of seeking to be my own savior. In that mindset, even if I obey or ask for forgiveness, I am really resisting the gospel and setting myself up as Savior.” To “get the gospel” is turn from self-justification and rely on Jesus’ record for a relationship with God.

Jonathan Edwards points out that “true virtue” is only possible for those who have experienced the grace of the gospel. Any person who is trying to earn their salvation does “the right thing” in order to get into heaven, or in order to better their self-esteem (etc.). In other words, the ultimate motive is self-interest.

But persons who know they are totally accepted already do “the right thing” out of sheer delight in righteousness for its own sake. Only in the gospel do you obey God for God’s sake, and not for what God will give you. Only in the gospel do you love people for their sake (not yours), do good for its own sake (not yours), and obey God for his sake (not yours). Only the gospel makes “doing the right thing” a joy and delight, not a burden or a means to an end.

What is Macarthur calling people to do? God is abandoning us because we are not following the rules?

BAKERSTREET POSTS:


KFC asks, Also, if you believe what Jesus said in Matthew 5 why don't you believe the other things that Jesus said when he quoted the OT?


This is a good question and understanding the meaning behind St.Matthew 5:17-19 helps to answer it.

In this passage, Jesus is stressing the perennial value of the OT. It is the Word of God and becasue it has divine authority it deserves total respect. The Old Law enjoined precepts of a moral, legal and liturgical type. The OLd Law promulagated through Moses and explained by the prophets was God's gift to His people and a kind of anticipation of the definitive Law wich the Christ or Messiah would lay down. The legal and liturgical precepts of the Old Law were laid down by God for a specific stage in salvation history; that is up to the First Coming of Christ and Christians are not obliged to observe them. Its moral precepts still hold good in the NT becasue they are for the most part specific divine positive promulatations of the Natural Law.

Here, our Lord gives those moral precepts even greater weight and meaning. So, Jesus was not only given to men as a Redeemer in whom they are to trust, but also as a Lawgiver whom they are to obey.

BAKERSTREET POSTS:

The people in the time of Jesus when He gave is Sermon on the Mount and the Beatitudes were confused over this thing. Christianity especially the groups which derived from Judasim had to face the question of the relationship between what Jesus had proclaimed and demanded and the Old Law given to the Fathers. "The law and prophets" which was clearly from God and represented His Will had been handed on to each generation with binding force. And it is Jesus who is to abolish it, who had professed of Himself that He was prepared to 'fulfill all Justice" 3:15.

The confusion wasn't over the perception of the God of the OT and and Jesus of the NT per se, rather over the perception of His perfecting or completing the precepts of the Old Law into the new Justice, if you will. The "law and the prophets" are GOd's revelation, but they are not yet definitive. His Will is revealed there, but not in its purest form.

St.Matt. 5:17-43, Our Lord begins with the law of Moses and pursues the theme of His new Law, His new Justice, further. V. 21-26 gives us an example of the way that Christ brought the law of Moses to its fulfillment by explaining the deeper meaning of the commandments of that law.

The OT is a shadow of the salvation of what is to come in the NT, in their fulfillment through Jesus Christ. We can no longer go back behind this fulfillment which CHrist Jesus has brought about.

v. 18, if we read the OT we can only do it in light of Jesus Christ's revelation. What we must take away from this is that God has spoken not only in the law and through the prophets, but also "through His Son" Heb. 1:1.

V. 20 sums it all up. "For I say to you, unless your justice far surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven." So it seems that something absolutely new is meant by this "justice" and it's not a question of a difference of degree, but of kind.

IGNAT LOYOLA POSTS:


LULAPILGRIM POSTS:


The notion of righteousness or justice can be found in St.Matt. 1:19; 3:15 in Romans 1:17, 18-32; 3: 21-24. A righteous person is one who sincerely strives to do the will of God which is found in His commandments. “Righteousness” in the language of Scripture is the same as what we now call “ holiness”. 1St.Jn 2:29; 3:7-10; Apoc. 22:11; Gen. 15:6 and Deut. 9:4.

As relating to the Beatitudes, righteousness goes to our trying to be ‘perfect’ as God is perfect. Our Lord is not asking us to simply have a vague desire for righteousness, but we should hunger and thirst for it that is, we should love and strive earnestly to seek what make us righteous in God’s eyes. Practically speaking, a person who genuinely wants to attain holiness should strive to keep the commandments, believe and love God for His sake, develop an intimate relationship with God in prayer, and make a valiant effort in one’s duties of state of life, meeting, as best one can, all social, professional and family responsibilities.

IGNAT LOYOLA POSTS:

It seems to me this ‘religious pride’ that you speak of is the same as that of the scribes and the Pharisees in St. Matt. 5:20. “For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven.” They had distorted the spirit of the Law, putting emphasis on its externals. For them, external fulfillment of the precepts of the Law was a guarantee of a person’s salvation. It’s saying, if I fulfill this, then I am righteous, I am holy and God is duty bound to save me.

For someone with this approach to sanctification, it is really not God who saves. Man saves himself through external works of the Law. Christ, in effect is saying here that the notion of salvation developed by the scribes and the Pharisees must be rejected.

In other words, justification and sanctification, is a grace from God and man’s role is one of cooperating with that grace by being faithful to it. Jesus gives the same teaching even in a clearer way in the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector. It was also the origin of one of St.Paul’s battles with the “Judaisers”.

KFC POSTS:

KFC, maybe I'm missing something I don't understand what do you mean by saying the main difference is a difference between judgment within history and at the end of history?

We agree that Sacred Scripture is divine Revelation from the Author, the Holy Spirit. That it's God's communication to us about Himself, the universe, people and their relation to Him, and with each other, and about their final destination, their salvation. That both the Old and the New Testaments are needed together, intertwined, for one supports the other. That God spoke to the Hebrews in many ways, and by many means.

That Doctrines had to be thought out, lived out, even pieced together over centuries as God prepared Israel for the Messiah, until finally the Apostles were instructed by the Messiah Himself. Pope Gregory 1 the Great said, "With the progress of the times, the knowledge of the spiritual fathers increased, for, in the science of God, Moses was more instructed than Abraham, the prophets more than Moses, and the Apostles more than the prophets. With Christ and the Apostles, general Revelation ended.


Christ was the fulfillment of the Law of the Old Testament St.Matt 5:17 and the ultimate Teacher and Lawgiver of humanity. The Apostles recognized that their task was to pass on, perfectly intact, the faith given to them by the Master. "Thou hast learned from many who can witness to it the doctrine which I hand down, give it unto the keeping of men thou canst trust, men who will know how to teach it to others besides themselves 2 Tim 2:2. "It is for thee to hold fast to the doctrine handed on to thee, the charge committed to thee" 2Tim3:14.

As you have been saying all along, there is no contradiction or conflict between the OT and the NT. (and here I would add, that as long as one considers Christ, Himself, as Divine). In the Old Testament, we hear from God. In the New Testament, God comes as the Holy Spirit, and Christ. They are one and the same, the Blessed Trinity. Jesus answered a question, "I came to fulfill the Law".

We hear all the time that God of the OT was one way, e.g. angry and strict, while Christ Jesus was mild and spoke of love, love, love in the New Testament. When,in fact, Christ in the NT calls us to the same rigors of obedience as did God in the OT...and His Justice is consistently meted out in the same way as well.