The 10 Comandments & The New Testament

Servant,

Thanks for sharing this.

Let me begin by saying I have the highest respect for Ray Comfort and I believe he is sincere. But my understanding of the pure Gospel is based on the revelation given to the Apostle Paul.

For instance, he defines the Gospel in 1 Cor. 15:1-4. Nothing is said about the law.

Then in Romans 1:16, 17, Paul says the Gospel (not the law) is the power unto salvation to all who believe. For in the Gospel (not the law), the rightousness of God is revealed.

Also in Romans, Paul makes it clear that by the deeds of the law, no one is justified. Paul also explains the purpose of the law in Romans and in Galatians.

Law has a purpose and it has not been done away with. So I certainly believe in it.

As for the Gospels, where Christ spoke about certain issues, it's important to remember context and the people to whom he was addressing. Dispensation comes into play.

I won'tgo into the "lordship vs. free grace" here, but it's important to look at the Gospel of John, the only book in the bible that states its purpose is to bring people to faith in Christ.

When Christ spoke to Nicodemus about being born again, He did not offer a list of commandments for him to keep. In fact, John 3 does not mention the law as playing a role in salvation.

As you may know, the Gospel of John uses the word "believe" about 96 (?) times.

When Christ spoke to the woman at the well, he did not offer the law. When He raised Lazarus from the dead, He clearlysaid those who believe (emphasis on believe -- nothing about the law) would never die.

Then there's the popular question in Acts: 'What must I do to be saved?"

According to Ray Comfort's view, Paul should have handed the guy a list of commandments, walked him through them and once the guy admitted he'd broken the commandments, then Paul would lead him to Christ.

But no. That's not how Paul responded. He kept it simple. "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved."

For it is by grace that we are save. I agree with the Reformers: It's faith alone in Christ alone."

Martin Luther achieved a good balance on the use of Law and Gospel. His view might be summarized in the saying, "comfort the afflicted and afflict the comforted."

In other words, use law to show people (like the Pharisees) they are sinners; but use Gospel (grace) to comfort those who know they are sinners (like the woman caught in adultery).

I strive for balance. No easy believism and no legalism. My goal is to not frustrate the Gospel.

Salvation is a FREE gift; but if you have to work for it (Rom. 4), it is no longer free.

Instead of emphasizing the law to people, I exalt the cross -- "Christ and Him crucified."

I cannot and will not add anything to what Christ did on the Cross.

But then someone may say that Comfort's method works and that people are getting saved. I say, "Praise the Lord." At the same time, I can't based my faith on experience and methods. My faith must rest on the clear teaching of Scripture.

Books have been written to suggest that Pentecostals have the fastest growing churches in America and especially over seas. Some would say, they must be right because of all the souls they're winning. When I hear the great reports, I say, "Praise the Lord."

But again, experience must not be the guide here. We must look to the Word of God as the final authority.

I pray that God continues to use you in bringing people to Christ.

Roscoe

[ December 11, 2003, 10:25 PM: Message edited by: Tractster ]

 

Ray Comfort is critical of tracts like, "Have you heard of the four spiritual laws?" He criticizes teachings that say "God has a plan for you."

My question is: Why can't he say what Paul said when presenting the Gospel?

As I mentioned previously, my concern is that he (in my opinion) puts too much emphasis on the law.

His analogy about putting on a parachute (also used by Kirk Cammeron)is weak at best. He's comparing a natural warning with the Gospel message. Somewhere, the analogy breaks down. The difference is that the Gospel has the power to save and my warning about a plane crash does not. One message is the inspired Word of God which is quick and powerful and sharper than a two-edged sword; the other message is human, which people can take or leave.

In other words, we're talking apples and oranges.

Then, even on the natural level, his analogy breaks down: It comes down to faith, whether one really believes the plane will or will not crash, irregardless of the how the message is presented.

Comfort quotes Martin Luther, but he fails to note that Luther also said it's foolish to try and remember and confess all sins. It can't be done, he said.

Servent, I think you and I agree on the essential elements of the Gospel. We just disagree on the presentation.

But hey, we're still brothers (assuming you're male ) in Christ and that's what matters.

Thanks for the discussion.

Roscoe