Jonathan sounds marvelous when he is clothed and in his right mind. :-) Izzy
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hughes Jonathan Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 3:14 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] 613 Commands Allow me to try to draw this out a bit further here. A picture would say it better but my drawing skills are quite suspect. Creation --> The Fall --> Law --> Failure to uphold the law --> Grace enters in Jesus Christ The usual method of thinking about this is to follow the word picture above. Creation occurs, and the Fall takes place. The law is given in order to help humankind climb back to God. Humankind fails at upholding the law so God sends plan B: Jesus Christ. Grace enters the world in the Person of Jesus Christ. Now we identify with Christ instead of the law. Retroactively grace is now extended back to those who followed the law, and even back to Adam himself. A mutually exclusive split is created between the law and grace. Lance is attempting to communicate something radically different. He is stating that grace is always present before law. Lance's/My version would be more like the following: Grace is not an aspect of who God is, not something to be squeezed out upon us but rather God Himself. Grace is present in who God is. The Fall does not change God into having to deliver a new way for us to relate to Him. It was always through grace. Grace is given to enable Israel prior to the giving of the law. This is why Lance mentions the paragraph prior to the decalogue in Exodus. It is God telling Israel who He is. It can all be wrapped up in a single word: grace. Recognizing humankind's failure God continues to be gracious by sending us His Son. It is a circular way of viewing things instead of the linear concept above. It is also a wholesome concept in the sense that it is not attempting to drive a wedge between law and grace. Rather, they are intertwined with grace coming first. Note Lance's other post today which was a quote from Karl Barth's 'Dogmatics in Outline', a small gem of a book. Take another read of this portion: "Gospel and law are not to be separated; they are one, in such a way that the gospel is the primary thing; that the glad tidings are first in the field and, as such, include the law. Because God is for us, we may also be for Him. Because He has given Himself to us we may also in gratitude give Him the trifle which we have to give. To hold to God thus always means that we receive everything wholly from God and so are wholly active for Him." Does this help explain what Lance is talking about? I hope one can see that there was no mention of being covered by grace or a criticism of the law itself. There was also no license given to live as we want. Jonathan Hughes Too cool! I can do whatever I want and live however I choose 'cuz I'm covered by grace!!!! K. The indicatives of Grace always preceed the imperatives of Law. Take a look at the paragraph just prior to the decalogue in Exodus. Lance ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
