Evangelism with out the Law?

You know, I agree with all of this, with this caveat: you are using several different terms for several different kinds of law: OT law, their own laws, the twisted law of the yakuza, men's law. My question is, which law is necessary for evangelism, as per the OP? My immediate reaction to the OP was that it was talking about OT law, in which case I disagree that it is needed for evangelism.

The Greek word nomoV has a very broad range of meaning, much like the English word law. It can mean anything from civil law to OT law to "principle." My BAGD lexicon has almost three whole columns on it. However, some languages (Japanese for example) distinguish the meanings with separate words.

I propose the following:
1. OT law: not needed for evangelism, but useful.
2. Civil law: not needed for evangelism, but useful.
3. Subculture law (yakuza for example): not needed for evangelism, but useful.
4. The law of conscience (God's law written in the heart, but corrupt): not needed for evangelism, but useful.
4. God's law, much stricter than even OT law as evidenced by the Sermon on the Mount: absolutely necessary for evangelism.

We're praising the Lord! Japan is tough sledding, which makes the victories that much sweeter.

 

May we back up here? All of this explanation is fine, and I don't necessarily disagree, but please define what you mean by law. My first reaction to your OP was that you were saying we must use the OT law in evangelism, since you specifically mentioned the Ten Commandments, and my reaction to that still stands. Is OT law what you meant? Or something else?

In my answer to Alan, I listed five kinds of law. Which of these are necessary for evangelism?

I reiterate:
1. OT law: not needed for evangelism, but useful.
2. Civil law: not needed for evangelism, but useful.
3. Subculture law (yakuza for example): not needed for evangelism, but useful.
4. The law of conscience (God's law written in the heart, but corrupt): not needed for evangelism, but useful.
4. God's law, much stricter than even OT law as evidenced by the Sermon on the Mount: absolutely necessary for evangelism.

 

Exactly, and that was my purpose as they are all useful and still bring us back to the origin of all laws - God and His law.

I agree with you brother. Now if the OP is saying the OT law is required for evangelism, I would disagree but I don't think it was being that narrow. I could be wrong though.

Praise God, brother. That is good to hear! :godisgood:

 

Hello John and Allan,

I'm sure you know this opening line of a book..

I feel this line is head on right and within what we are talking about. Man must see himself in light of God and the Law is what helps us do this. It is a measuring stick that can't be met other than through Christ. In other words as we look at the Law of God, we see not only who God is, but also a better picture of who we ARE NOT.

The 10 commandments are really a picture of God. They are the "10 words" of God, telling us who he is.

Now I'm going to disagree with Allan on a few things, but it is my guess that Allan and I are not far apart. It may come down to just the meaning of the words we use.

Many divide OT law into two parts. Moral law and Ceremonial Law.

John R. Rice's book, "Here Are More Questions", chapter 27 divides the Law this way.

The Moral Law is the 10 commandments. Rice and many other from that day says that one of the 10 are part of the Ceremonial Law. That view is changing among IFB today and many if not most feel all 10 are indeed the Moral Law. Rice even allows for this, but did not hold to it.

Law of Moses (aka the “Book of the Law,” or “Book of the Covenant”, “the Mosaic Law”, “The Ceremonial Law”), pertains to the Jewish nation, much like we have our own laws in our nation, and our on laws/rules in our local church, and schools what have ya. These Ceremonial Laws do not pertain to every person in the while world.

The Moral Law does pertain to all of mankind. This is true if you believe in 9 or 10 Moral Laws. These laws are what was written on the hearts of all men and also what brings guilt in men when they sin. Even when they don't know God the sense of good and bad (moral) remains in man.

The Law of God is the Moral Law. The NT does not annul the Moral Law, but broadens it. It works in mans heart in the 3 areas that I posted above.

 

In Gal 3 Paul said that the law was the schoolmaster that brings us to Christ.


Paul also said he did not know sin but by the law.

 

So we're on the same page. Now it is up to our OP author to tell us what he meant.

It's in your court, Fletcher Law. And by the way, welcome to the BB. :wavey:

 

Well now, how could I disagree with John R. Rice?! I've heard him preach this and read it in his books, of course. :thumbs:

Here's the problem: distinguishing the moral law from the ceremonial law! Even in the Ten Commandments, we have the conundrum of the sabbath law. How do we account for the ceremonial sabbath law in with the moral law there? For my own part, I once preached a message on "The Moral Sabbath," in which I talked about the rest of God on the seventh day and how damaging a workaholic can be to his family, etc. But of course there is much connected with sabbath law that is ceremonial.

Similarly, I discovered something interesting one day not that long ago (several years). We sometimes read in the law of Moses that something is an "abomination" to God. In every case these things were very obviously in the realm of moral law. (This does not count when God told the Israelites, "This shall be an abomination to you.") This is one way I distinguish moral law from ceremonial law. :type:

 

What does the gospel without the law look like? I have never seen any such thing.

 

Amen. :thumbs: