Here is the link to the study and discussion material for Lesson #11 (4th Quarter 2011): Freedom in Christ

Here are some study helps: Study Helps, Lesson 11

The result of abiding in Jesus is obedience and righteousness that fully fulfills the demands of law and justice. "Holiness finds that it has nothing more to require." {COL 162.4} The idea that this kind of law-keeping is sinful and unacceptable to God is unbiblical.

Do you not believe EGW when she said that praise, penitence, etc. from true believers are unacceptable to God with Christ's imputed righteousness?

Perhaps the righteousness that fulfills God's law is found in the holiness of Christ's life imputed to us, not the holiness of our imitation of His life.

I have some friends who are looking into the "dichotomy" in this week's verses:
5:3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.
5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

They are thinking that the law in 5:3 is the ceremonial law, and the law in 5:14 is the moral law. But I don't think Gal 5:2–12 is talking about the ceremonial law or feast-keeping at all. Paul's point is found in Gal 5:4 - "Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace." The contention is over being justified BY keeping the law and therefore earning grace, as opposed to being justified by grace FOR the purpose of keeping the law.

Paul was clear in Gal 5:6 that circumcision is irrelevant - "For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love." Whether one does it or not has no bearing on salvation.

What he is saying is that if one trusts in circumcision, or any other bodily exercise, as the means of salvation, he is denying the need for Christ's sacrifice. Rather than righteousness being achieved by any form of physical activity, true righteousness can only be found by faith. As he says in Gal 5:5, "For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith."

This is merely a continuation of Paul's line of reasoning in the previous chapter. The Hagar/Ishmael plan was doomed because it was fundamentally based on man's ability to fulfill God's promises. God's plan, which lays man's glory in the dust, is to fulfill His promises in His way, while we are to accept it by faith.

However, if anyone wants to meet God's standard by keeping the law, he must keep the whole law. There is such a covenant available. It is the Old Covenant. But the plan of reaching God's standard through human effort only sounds reasonable to those who have no true conception of God's standard.

I think part of our difficulty in understanding this is the deeply-ingrained belief that keeping the moral law is crucial. Hence, we are loath to accept anything that has the slightest smell of downplaying our obedience. However, when it comes to gaining eternal life, that is exactly what we must do. Our obedience is important, but it is the cart that follows the horse of grace. If we think that any of our good works will earn the slightest iota of credit toward our salvation, then we deny Christ.

No, the OC was not a covenant of grace. It was a covenant of works. The Israelites were so ignorant of their spiritual condition that they thought they could fulfill God's law and please God by their works. Only after they fully realized the impossibility of the task were they prepared to accept the NC.

God saved them physically from Egypt. The plagues and the Red Sea crossing made this obvious. But there was a more important work of salvation to be done, one that the Israelites didn't even know they needed.

So God gave them His law. Being foolish, the Israelites thought they could keep this law if they merely exerted themselves enough. So they readily agreed to do everything God said.

A few weeks later, they were worshiping the golden calf. Now it was clear that they could not keep their end of the covenant. Now, they had clearly earned for themselves the punishment of death. Now, they saw their need for a Savior from their spiritual bondage. Now, they were ready to receive the New Covenant.

I'm uncomfortable with that sort of wording. It's too exaggerative. To my mind, what you are saying about circumcision should be equally applicable to baptism.

In a sense, it's true. In a sense, it would be misleading and improper to say "baptism has no bearing at all upon salvation."

Do you see what I'm trying to say?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Perhaps. But Paul did say, "Neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision." So I think it is safe to say that either way avails nothing.

Could we say the same of baptism? I have wrestled with that in years past, and my conclusion is, Yes, though not very emphatic. There are differences between circumcision and baptism, so they're not exactly on the same footing.

Baptism of the flesh - dunking in water - is really only a symbol of the true baptism of dying with Jesus. (See Romans 6.) The baptism that is critical is when we are baptized by the Spirit, and the filth of sin washed away.

Similarly, circumcision of the flesh - cutting off the foreskin - is really only a symbol of the true circumcision of the heart. (See Romans 2.) The circumcision that counts is when we "cut off" the rebellion in our lives and submit to God. (See Deuteronomy 10:16.)

Baptism is a public declaration of our union with Christ; we are proclaiming our choice to submit to His Lordship. Circumcision is not, for the most part, a matter of public scrutiny. In this they are different. While circumcision is a private affair, baptism reveals our faith to the world, whether to our advantage or disadvantage. It is a form of confessing Jesus Christ and Him crucified.

However, as far as the salvific efficacy of bodily exercises of any sort, they are equally ineffective. And to trust in such things is worse than useless, because such trust can lull the sinner into a false sense of security.

The Jews fell into that trap, trusting their salvation in the nationality of the womb through which they passed at birth. The Catholics fell into that trap, thinking that a little water sprinkled by a priest will do the trick. And many Adventists have fallen into that trap, believing that faithfulness in proper Adventist behavior afforded safety. The lesson of Galatians is needed today as much as ever.

Jesus' blood and righteousness makes the righteous results of abiding in Jesus more fragrant and more pleasing to our heavenly Father. However, Ellen never once says such righteousness is sinful. Jesus would never use His blood or righteousness to make something sinful acceptable and pleasing to God. His blood does not cover sin. Instead, it gives Him the legal right to blot it out with Satan in the lake of fire at the end of time. The righteous results of abiding in Jesus do not require blood atonement.

Ellen wrote, "Everyone who by faith obeys God's commandments will reach the condition of sinlessness in which Adam lived before his transgression." Here's why and how: "It is the privilege of every believer in Christ to possess Christ's nature, a nature far above that which Adam forfeited by transgression. He who sees the Son by faith and believes in Him, is obedient to the commandments of God, and in this obedience he finds everlasting life." The idea that this kind of obedience and righteousness is somehow sinful and requires the covering, atoning blood of Jesus to ascend acceptable to the Father calls into question several pillars of faith.

However, if I read you right, you believe the righteous results of abiding in Jesus are sinful and, therefore, unacceptable and displeasing to our heavenly Father. As such, what is the difference between works without faith and faith that works by love and purifies the soul? Seems to me, if what you believe is right, the plan of salvation is failing to save sinners from sinning. Which leaves us with one conclusion, namely, Jesus saves us in our sins. However, Ellen wrote:


Again, I hear you saying, no, Jesus has no choice but to save us in our sins because we are incapable of "righteousness and true holiness".