No, although we do fulfill the law, Romans 13:10
Good quote, oatmeal!
Some additional thoughts:
A law provides both instruction of what to do or not do, as well as the penalty for not doing the instruction correctly. One way to fulfill a law is to disobey it and pay the penalty. Thus, if the penalty of sin (breaking God's law) is death, and we die, we have fulfilled the law. But it isn't a very satisfying fulfillment when you're dead.
When Christ died, He paid that penalty--He fulfilled the penalty part of a law that had been broken. That's why He said, "It is finished!" on the cross.
The other way to fulfill a law is to obey it, as in your Rom 13:10 passage. Such a fulfillment is never complete until you're dead, but the law of God would be in place forever if death only comes from breaking the law. Is this why God planned such a means to life that required death (Jesus' death in our place)? so that we wouldn't have such a burden hanging over us for eternity? (I'm asking because I'm not sure of God's purposes here.)
No problem: When Christ died, He did so having never sinned. Thus He fulfilled the obedience part of the law until He died. That's also why He said, "It is finished!" on the cross.
The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for April 22nd, 2012 05:36 PM
|toldailytopic: Does God require those in the Body of Christ keep the Law?|
In answer to the thread topic, I'd have to say "Yes." Otherwise the sacrifice of Christ means nothing. If we sin (disobey the law), and who doesn't, then Christ's death pays the penalty (fulfills the law)--the Law is thereby "kept".
But what about the other way to keep the law? does the Body of Christ have to do that? Some things, yes, and some things, no. We are not required to be circumcised--Paul was very clear about that. We are required to love our neighbor, if [MENTION=12603]oatmeal[/MENTION]'s verse, and the foregoing verses, mean anything. Why would Paul bring it up if it wasn't something he was telling the Romans (and us) to do. And Paul specifically mentions the latter 5 commandments in vs 9 as an explanation for Vs 8, where he commands
his readers to love one another.
Why do we need to love one another? Gen 9:6 explains it: that your neighbor is the image of God, and doing any of those things in Rom 13:9 to a man is like doing them to God! Rom 13:1-7 is similar (expressed best in vs 1)--we should obey/be subject to the "higher powers", because they are ordained of God; they get their power/authority from God. And (vs 2) if you resist their power, you resist...what's that word?...the ORDINANCE of God. What is an ordinance? According to dictionary.com, it is "an authoritative rule or law, a decree or command". Paul, in those words, is saying that we should obey the commands of the authority over us because they are in the position of God to us.
So let that sink in a bit.... Now, how could it be that we DON'T have to obey God's commands ("keep His law") but Paul says we must keep the commands of God's ordained governors like we do God Himself? Yet some would suggest Paul says we don't have to keep God's commands????
If we are not required to keep the law of God (in the second sense outlined above), then the Rom 13 chapter--the whole thing--becomes utter nonsense. And it seems to include both tables (summed up with "Love God" and "Love your neighbor") of the 10 commandments, and multiple other, lesser laws, like
- not having a parapet on your roof (Deut 22:8) where such should apply, because THAT is not how you love your neighbor--you don't let him fall off your roof.
- having sexual relations with your aunt (Lev 20:19), because that is not loving to your neighbor
- allowing a dangerous ox (or other animal) to continue to hurt people (Exo 21:29), because it isn't loving to your neighbor.
- charging a poor neighbor usury (Exo 22:25), because it isn't loving to your neighbor
- should we continue down the list?
These things are not all specified in the New Testament, because God's principle of loving our neighbor is broader than even what the Old Testament revealed.
Then, must we obey the whole law in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy? No. Circumcision is specifically withdrawn. Avoiding unclean foods is specifically withdrawn. Some would say specific sabbath keeping is specifically withdrawn. Temple rituals and sacrifices are specifically withdrawn.
Some of the law we can debate over, but Paul in Rom 13 gives specific commands that he expected his readers to obey. Rom 13 is a set of laws or a part of "the law" he was laying down for his readers. And in Rom 13:9, Paul ties his law back to the 10 Commandments. Could he get more specific than that about whether the body of Christ must obey the law? I can't see how.