Monday, September 10, 2007

Incorrect sayings from a man after God's own heart...

The other day I said I'd mention some things that people said in the scriptures that, when held up in the light of truth, simply either aren't true OR need to be looked at in context.

One huge example of incorrect words that sticks out to me is David's words in Psalm 119 (the Psalm is attributed to David by many scholars, and I agree with their reasons but I won't get into that here). In this Psalm, David seems to have a pretty high view of his keeping of God's law.

Quick examples:
34 Give me understanding, and I shall keep Your law;
Indeed, I shall observe it with my whole heart.

43 And take not the word of truth utterly out of my mouth,
For I have hoped in Your ordinances.
44 So shall I keep Your law continually,
Forever and ever.
45 And I will walk at liberty,
For I seek Your precepts.

55 I remember Your name in the night, O LORD,
And I keep Your law.
56 This has become mine,
Because I kept Your precepts.

92 Unless Your law had been my delight,
I would then have perished in my affliction.
93 I will never forget Your precepts,
For by them You have given me life.

Wow! This could end up being a very long post, because there's so much to discuss just in those few verses! I'll try to be brief. And I'll just say that the main reason I bring all this up is because I hear Christians quoting verses such as these and using them in Christian teachings!

First off, let it always be known that the Law is holy, just and good (see Rom 7:12). The Law is from God. It's God's word. We can never speak bad about the Law. What's always in question is man's keeping of God's Law!

David thought that if God would just give him understanding, he would be able to keep His Law. In fact, he said he would observe it with his whole heart. He thought that hoping in God's ordinances would result in him keeping God's Law "continually, forever and ever." David thought he would walk in liberty by his keeping of God's precepts. One sentence that really sticks out to me is when David says, "by them you have given me life."

If we were to bring all of this into our Christian churches and teach all of David's words to our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, my question is... would there be a lot of "Amen's?" Would the church today see anything wrong with David's words? Do they know how to sort through - and "rightly divide" - the word of truth?

The Apostle Paul, after years of thinking like David had thought in all of this, ended up coming to a completely different conclusion. Paul taught the church the opposite of what David had written, and of what he himself had previously thought! That's what I'm getting at here. Just because a highly credible person said it (David was "a man after God's own heart"), it doesn't mean he was correct.

Contrast the above verses with these New Covenant revelations:

Gal 5:1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage.

Rom 7:5 For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were aroused by the law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death. (See also verses 8-11, in which Paul says that the Law, which he thought was to bring life, actually brought death, and see 2 Cor. 3:7-10 in which Paul calls the Law the ministry of death and the ministry of condemnation).

Both David and Paul had thought that they received life by the Law. The old thinking was that true liberty was found in law-keeping. But the "yoke of bondage" that Paul talks about in Galatians is the Law! He says stand free in Christ and don't get caught up in the bondage of Law-keeping.

There is no amount of seeking God, seeking after understanding, meditating upon Law, delighting in the Law... etc... that will ever enable any person to ever keep the Law. David, although having somewhat of an understanding of mercy and grace, didn't have the full revelation of the New Covenant that we have today. He spoke from deep within his heart... but his heart and his understanding was simply not correct.

I'm not picking on David. My aim is to point us all in the direction of the New Covenant (which is not "Old Covenant, Part 2"). Whenever we read the words of the scriptural characters, we have to always keep this question in mind: "Is this the truth of the New Covenant?" Just because it's in the Bible, doesn't mean it's true and it doesn't mean it's a Christian teaching. And even if it's a word spoken by someone in the "New Testament," that also doesn't mean it's a Christian teaching. I'll get into that next.

5 comments:

  1. If it is in the bible it is true.
    David was showing two things here, the law that would set him free is the law of love, and that no matter how much we want to, we cannot fulfill it depart from His strength.
    All we do now is by the power of the spirit. Fruits of the same.

    ReplyDelete
  2. David was not talking about the law of love. David was talking about the law that Paul would later come to find out to be the ministry of death and condemnation (2 Cor 3:7-9). The fruit of the law that David was talking about, as Paul would later come to find out, is death, condemnation, bondage, guilt and sin.

    As I mentioned in this post:

    Rom 7:5 For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were aroused by the law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death. (See also verses 8-11, in which Paul says that the Law, which he thought was to bring life, actually brought death, and see 2 Cor. 3:7-10 in which Paul calls the Law the ministry of death and the ministry of condemnation).

    Paul came to find out that he had to be freed from the law in order to truly walk according to the Spirit of the Life of Jesus Christ.

    ReplyDelete
  3. So indeed, if it's in the Bible, it's "true," but it's only true in the sense that God meant it to be true. In the case of the law, God intentionally gave the law as the ministry of death and condemnation. David thought he could find life and righteousness and fruit in the law, but it only produced quite the opposite. While David had somewhat of an understanding of God's grace, if he'd fully known and understood the gospel as Paul (who referred to himself as a "Hebrew of Hebrews" and as "blameless" according to the law), he would have also realized that he had to die to the law in order to be found in Christ alone.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks for this post Joel. It helps answer some oft asked questions (as you mentioned in the original post)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thanks Jake. These are things that I have struggled with, or at least questioned, throughout the years, and it really helps to have a view of the scriptures as a whole - especially what is revealed in the New Covenant - in order to really begin to shed light on all of this.

    ReplyDelete