He’s making a serious mistake. There IS a distinction between ceremonial and moral law in Paul’s writings which is he calls the works of the law “obsolete” and not merely insufficient for salvation. Surely Paul does not mean the moral law ( murder, adultery, idol worship, covert, honour mother and father…) obsolete. What Luther and Calvin miss is that faith without works is dead. My works (moral, not ceremonial) do not save me, only Grace through faith in Christ’s sacrifice does. But my lack of work prevents me from obtaining this priceless gift. If “He who can do good and does not has sinned” and I continue to not do good then I am in a deliberate state of perpetual un-repentance. How can I enter the kingdom of God while I’m insisting on committing a particular sin and justifying it to myself and even promoting and preaching it to others rather than struggling against it and repenting from it?
You should have T. David Gordon on to talk about Galatians!
Not sure how any honest person could read it other than the way Dr Schreiner just described.
He’s making a serious mistake. There IS a distinction between ceremonial and moral law in Paul’s writings which is he calls the works of the law “obsolete” and not merely insufficient for salvation. Surely Paul does not mean the moral law ( murder, adultery, idol worship, covert, honour mother and father…) obsolete.
What Luther and Calvin miss is that faith without works is dead.
My works (moral, not ceremonial) do not save me, only Grace through faith in Christ’s sacrifice does. But my lack of work prevents me from obtaining this priceless gift. If “He who can do good and does not has sinned” and I continue to not do good then I am in a deliberate state of perpetual un-repentance. How can I enter the kingdom of God while I’m insisting on committing a particular sin and justifying it to myself and even promoting and preaching it to others rather than struggling against it and repenting from it?