Yahweh.com 's Bad Interpretation of Matthew 7 and the Christian Life

This was my response to an article excerpt posted on Isaiah's blog. Please recognize that my response is at the article and not Isaiah. The excerpt is posted on his blog here. The article can be found in it's entirety at http://www.yahweh.com/GWBuffalo/GWB.htm. You need only to read the excerpt to understand my reply. To understand the weird spelling and vocabulary used in the article read www.yahweh.com.

Reply starts here:

Who are they arguing against? They never state it. Who are "those" preachers that preach "breaking the laws of Yahweh"?

Read their quote: "The Savior's own words show that He will deny anyone who practices breaking Yahweh's Laws—commits iniquity." 

Is that what this passage is saying given its context? Was not the whole point of "Yahweh's Law" given to show men that they can NOT obey it? Was that NOT the problem with the Pharisees who were main targets in this Sermon on the Mount? What about Galatians 3.24 which says the law was our tutor (Gk. pedagogue) to lead us to Christ, but now that faith has come, we are not longer under a tutor?

This NOT to say that we are to disregard the Law, but this article states (by the quote mentioned) that Christ will deny anyone who practices breaking Yahweh's laws. NO. Christ will deny those whom HE DOES NOT KNOW. There are people doing all these righteous deeds in Jesus' name, and they think they know Him (Notice their claim in Matt 7.22). But He does not know them. So then, their law-abiding, is counted LAWLESSNESS, because they are WITHOUT CHRIST. How do we know they think they are righteous? 1) They are performing these things in Christ's name, and 2) They are actually using this as an ARGUMENT at their JUDGMENT! Standing before Christ in His glory, they really do believe in their own righteousness.

The point this article is missing: You can obey the Law all you want, but if Christ does not know you, your righteousness is really lawlessness, and you're going to hell.
["You" is a general word here; I'm not directing it at you, the reader] The necessity is Christ, not the Law.

I support holding people accountable for sin, and the inevitability for justifying faith to evidence itself in a changed life (i.e. works; James 2) I strongly disagree with the emphasis in this article on BEHAVIOR (sprouting from a weak treatment of the text in Matthew 7 as well as others in the whole article).
"[...] Man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart." (1 Sam. 16.7)

 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this entry.
Comments

Leave a comment

 Enter the above security code (required)

 Name

 Email (will not be published)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.