quote:

---

Originally posted by spenlake

Jo-Ann,

God bless you. The gospel is radical, awesome, unthinkable, amazing grace. Yet, it is truly appreciated only by those who understand the magnitude of their inability to meet the unwavering demands of perfection dictated by the law. Thank you for your note.

---

quote:

---

One of the basic things he points out is that until roughly the early 1900s, the evangelical method of ALL the great revivalists (from Whitefield to Wesley to Spurgeon to Finney to Moody) was to use the law in the scriptural sense of bringing conviction BEFORE giving the good news of grace to them. This method (which I'm not an expert at yet), is supported by Scripture and has stood the test of time as THE divinely ordained way to bring people to a realization of their abject need of Christ.

---

quote:

---

I have no doubt that many who have been seduced into believing the "love, not judgment" message will find Mr. Comfort's message quite offensive, but that's okay; Paul's message was an offense to some in his day, too.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JEE

quote:

---

Originally posted by spenlake

John,

Thank you for the great explanation. While preaching the law to the unbelieving seems obvious, I am curious if you feel that there is a place for the law for Christians. If so or if not, why? Also, have you ever read the book, The Proper Distinction between the Law and the Gospel by CFW Walther?

---

Hi Spen,

I believe there is indeed a place for the use of the Law in Christians; my point in the previous post was that the Law brings the knowledge of sin, period. As Paul said in Galatians, the Law was not able to give life, only CHRIST can do that.

If the Law is used to teach us what sin is and to reveal to us the depth of our own depravity, that's it's appropriate use, in my understanding. However, the sanctification of the believer (Christ reigning in the heart) is specifically and only received BY FAITH; the Law is powerless in and of itself to do anything but convict.

I'm not aware of the book you mention. With regard to the issue of Law & Gospel, my theological perspective has been most influenced by the writings of the Holiness movement, e.g., Charles G. Finney, John Wesley, John Fletcher, Adam Clarke, et al., though I have fairly extensively studied the early church fathers, Church history, the history, doctrine, and practice of the Great Awakenings, and the writings of the early Pentecostal movement (I'm fourth-generation Pentecostal in heritage).

Blessings,

John

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sparknheart

Great discussion, thanks to all.
Go ahead and cut me up and let me know where I'm wrong here:

Love is God’s foundational attribute and from love all other attributes flow, including the attribute of a righteous judge. A loving God forgives all. A righteous God judges all. God’s justice separates all. God’s righteous judgment separates those sinners that have chosen to properly accept his gift of forgiveness and those that reject it. God fries no one, but simply separates those that have chosen their eternal address by either accepting or rejecting his forgiveness through trust/faith and repentance. Hell protects God’s Love from being diluted, redemptive love or otherwise.

There is a highway to hell and a less worn little foot path to heaven. By obedience to the road signs, written in the love of Jesus’ footsteps, we fulfill both the law and love.

Shalom,

Mark

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by spenlake

Selah: Who reflected love so much it was like a magnet to those she/he was trying to win over. Do you ever wonder about this?

Spen: ...Please don't misunderstand me. I believe that we are to love, especially among ourselves, and that there is to be a difference between the community of Christians and the world on this point.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Selah

quote:

---

Originally posted by spenlake

Selah: Who reflected love so much it was like a magnet to those she/he was trying to win over. Do you ever wonder about this?

Spen: ...Please don't misunderstand me. I believe that we are to love, especially among ourselves, and that there is to be a difference between the community of Christians and the world on this point.

---

Hi Spen,

Thanks for your response. I must say I'm confused by your statement above. I assume you are referring to Gal 6:10 (?), but it would be helpful if you'd clarify.

Maybe you can explain how you personally do this kind of preferential love. Where do you draw your lines? What specifically would you do different for me that you wouldn't do for an unbeliever?

I guess I don't know about all the rest. I've seen so much misuse of the law in preaching, manipulating, scaring, and pushing unbelievers, I can't help but think there is a better way. Add to that what I've personally witnessed - loving self sacrifice that melts the hardest of hearts... and it's a hard call.

I'm still processing :)


love
selah

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Selah

spen, seriously do you believe the "one another" verses are specifically instructing believers to love each other with preference?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by spenlake

quote:

---

Originally posted by Selah

spen, seriously do you believe the "one another" verses are specifically instructing believers to love each other with preference?

---

I seriously believe that the world will know that they are His disciples if His disciples love one another. The one another is reciprical and has to refer to one disciple to another. It also seems to me that the term, "the brethren" refers to believers in the context. I have a hard time understanding "the brethren" to mean mankind in general.

Again, this is my understanding of the passages. I have not found what I believe to be a stronger interpretation stating something else. They have to mean something and I think that they mean Christians.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Selah

quote:

---

Originally posted by spenlake

quote:

---

Originally posted by Selah

spen, seriously do you believe the "one another" verses are specifically instructing believers to love each other with preference?

---

I seriously believe that the world will know that they are His disciples if His disciples love one another. The one another is reciprical and has to refer to one disciple to another. It also seems to me that the term, "the brethren" refers to believers in the context. I have a hard time understanding "the brethren" to mean mankind in general.

Again, this is my understanding of the passages. I have not found what I believe to be a stronger interpretation stating something else. They have to mean something and I think that they mean Christians.

---

Hi Spen,

Thanks for your honesty. This is different than John's understanding above. My question is how do you do this? (I'm serious Spen) Help me out. Say you're going through one 24 hour period... you meet 5 believers and 5 non believers along the way... how do you love the believes differently? What does it look like? Can you give an example?

Thanks,
love
selah

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by spenlake

quote:

---

Originally posted by Selah

quote:

---

Originally posted by spenlake

quote:

---

Originally posted by Selah

spen, seriously do you believe the "one another" verses are specifically instructing believers to love each other with preference?

---

I seriously believe that the world will know that they are His disciples if His disciples love one another. The one another is reciprical and has to refer to one disciple to another. It also seems to me that the term, "the brethren" refers to believers in the context. I have a hard time understanding "the brethren" to mean mankind in general.

Again, this is my understanding of the passages. I have not found what I believe to be a stronger interpretation stating something else. They have to mean something and I think that they mean Christians.

---

Hi Spen,

Thanks for your honesty. This is different than John's understanding above. My question is how do you do this? (I'm serious Spen) Help me out. Say you're going through one 24 hour period... you meet 5 believers and 5 non believers along the way... how do you love the believes differently? What does it look like? Can you give an example?

Thanks,
love
selah

---

I don't think it works that way that "i love them differently." I can only love them with the love that I have in Christ because in this is love, not that we loved Him but that he loved us and gave Himself up for us. I can only love with the gospel anbd its message.

What will happen is that because this love is "mutual" between the believers, this will be manifest between and among us. We will both rejoice in the gospel together. I think you must witness something of this when, though we have strong disagreements, I rejoice with John as he expressed the gospel. We are unified and there is a love, though other ideas of his may bug me the gospel is foundational. If I interact with a non-Christian, this just isn't there. I will espress this love but it will be offensive to a non-believer in some way. In any case, in as much as I believe in and understand the gospel I will manifest this. To the extent that I don't, (and if you have followed my posts you will witness this), it is evidence of my weak faith and my poor understanding of the magnitude of how offensive my own sins are to God.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JEE

quote:

---

Originally posted by Selah

quote:

---

One of the basic things he points out is that until roughly the early 1900s, the evangelical method of ALL the great revivalists (from Whitefield to Wesley to Spurgeon to Finney to Moody) was to use the law in the scriptural sense of bringing conviction BEFORE giving the good news of grace to them. This method (which I'm not an expert at yet), is supported by Scripture and has stood the test of time as THE divinely ordained way to bring people to a realization of their abject need of Christ.

---

Hi John,

Thanks for the link. I don't have time to listen right now, so would you mind clarifying something for me? When you said this method is supported by scripture - what scripture are you referring to? I'm not claiming it's not supported, just wondering what you're specifically referring to here.

---

Hi Selah,

Paul's line of argument in Romans 1, 2, & 3 lay out plainly that "all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God," and that this universal sinfulness has been entered into voluntarily by all. Paul further states in Romans that "sin is not credited where there is no law," and "by the law is the knowledge of sin." The climax of the argument comes in chapter seven, in which Paul shows the utter futility of selfish attempts to keep the law, while the "law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" (the Gospel applied) brings the righteousness of the heart that fulfills the heart of the law.

quote:

---

Also, when you said ALL the great revivalists used the law to bring conviction before giving the good news of grace to them. It really made me wonder what would've been the fruit of just one revivalist who was the good news of grace. Who reflected love so much it was like a magnet to those she/he was trying to win over. Do you ever wonder about this?

---

I don't see the dichotomy of "law vs. love" or "law vs. grace", as typically explained in this forum and in typical American churchianity, as scripturally valid. As the passage you pointed out in Romans 13 makes clear, love FULFILLS the totality of the spirit of the law, and without love, all rule-keeping is meaningless and futile.

For example, in telling my 20-month-old daughter, "Don't touch my (piping hot) cup of coffee!" though I'm clearly making a judgment call, (and she's sure to be QUITE offended by this rule!) it's definitely not the case that I'm being anything BUT loving in "laying down the law" to her like this. (What's really beautiful to me is how my little darling will usually begin crying in response to this, and will throw up her arms for me to hold her--what a picture of repentant faith and love).

Would you think a lifeguard telling people not to swim in a certain area because it is dangerous is necessarily being unloving by denying them their freedom to do as they please?

Ray Comfort's presentation of the Law is not offensive in the sense that he does NOT try to make it some kind of personal thing, virtually shaking the Bible in people's faces or anything as silly as that. The offense that the law brings is that it lays the blame for sin squarely where the Bible does--on the sinner himself. As Paul said in Rom. 1 "so that all men are without excuse."

I should hasten to add that Comfort does not teach that the law should be preached to those who have already been born again as a way of sanctification. The short presentation of "Hell's Best Kept Secret" (maybe 40 minutes long if I recall correctly) explains this clearly.

Blessings in Christ to All,

John

I have 2 sons, 26 and 20, who are way into Ray Comfort's stuff. I do admire him and I am still a bit put off at the way he evangelizes. I had seen him years ago and he does seem harsh. I guess I'd be more aligned with Selah and admit too, I may be off balanced toward the love and grace mode.
What Comfort does that I wonder about is ask people if they keep the ten commandments. Of course, no one can truly say they do this perfectly...even Ray admits he fails. So Ray says since you admit you have lied what does that make you? The one quizzed eventually says..."A Liar" and the questions roll on till the person eventually admits they are a lying, theiving adulterer due for the righteous wrath of God. It is amazing as most of these do not seem offended at Ray, but are brought to conviction of their own heart. Ray also goes where most of us never do...the inner city slums and druggy hangouts. He offers them food and the Gospel. So I'm not harshly criticising, just wondering. My sons have sent off for his major study courses.

I do see how Finney and Wesley and those did preach the law first. Looking at the history of their efectiveness I cannot imagine anyone having to much criticism for these guys and their methods. Comfort even tells of a meeting with Bill Bright and the following discussion of Bright's famous 4 spiritual laws. Bright came to see a major flaw in his presentation of the gospel. How humble he was!
Still, I want to prove to the unconverted that I love them with christ's love before I try to bring them to conviction of sin. I am much more about the "friendship style of evangelism" than the "confrontational". And this may be just me. I'd not try to dissuade Comfort from his style.

Praying we all serve God in yielding our hearts and mouths to Him!
Barry

---