This is a subject that has been close to my heart over the last few months. I think that this is a subject that we need to grasp. Now, I am not sure if we can completely grasp the subject but I think that we need to understand it better than we do.
There have been many people who say that you need to show and preach the LAW before you can show and extend GRACE. The reason for this is that they (individual you are reaching) can not see the need for GRACE if they are not confronted with the LAW. When they are confronted with the LAW, they will see the need.
Here is my question: Is this BIBLICAL ? I would LOVE to have people from both sides of the perspective speak up. I will allow difference of opinions on my site. I think that we can learn from each other and be challenged together.
On Pastor Brian's site, he asked individuals to comment about the comments that were in his post. During the comment sections Rhea mentioned the following:
As far as regarding the women at the well, Jesus pointed out her sin ("Go and tell your husband...."). He didn't simply give her a "warm & fuzzy" measure. Sometimes I'm not even sure how "worth it" it is to try to argue/discuss things with ppl like that :-)
Couple of things, my comments were never rude. Also, I was challenging (originally) that the story of the woman at the well is MUCH MORE than what they were using it for. It shows us that the message is for everyone. Jesus broke many barriers, laws and customs to talk to her. Also there is a point that RHEA brought out that I want to share to really get the conversation going or at least out there. Here is her portion highlighted (bold).
As far as regarding the women at the well, Jesus pointed out her sin ("Go and tell your husband...."). He didn't simply give her a "warm & fuzzy" measure.
Now, I know that you and a lot of your friends hold dearly to LAW and LAW MUST be preached first. But when you read the story, do you really see that ?? Take a look at the story. I know that I just did the story but here it is again for this conversation:
Jesus and the Samaritan Woman
Jesus left Judea and started for Galilee again. This time he had to go through Samaria, 5and on his way he came to the town of Sychar. It was near the field that Jacob had long ago given to his son Joseph. The well that Jacob had dug was still there, and Jesus sat down beside it because he was tired from traveling. It was noon, and after Jesus' disciples had gone into town to buy some food, a Samaritan woman came to draw water from the well.
Jesus asked her, "Would you please give me a drink of water?"
"You are a Jew," she replied, "and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink of water when Jews and Samaritans won't have anything to do with each other?"
Jesus answered, "You don't know what God wants to give you, and you don't know who is asking you for a drink. If you did, you would ask me for the water that gives life."
"Sir," the woman said, "you don't even have a bucket, and the well is deep. Where are you going to get this life-giving water? Our ancestor Jacob dug this well for us, and his family and animals got water from it. Are you greater than Jacob?"
Jesus answered, "Everyone who drinks this water will get thirsty again. But no one who drinks the water I give will ever be thirsty again. The water I give is like a flowing fountain that gives eternal life."
The woman replied, "Sir, please give me a drink of that water! Then I won't get thirsty and have to come to this well again."
Jesus told her, "Go and bring your husband."
The woman answered, "I don't have a husband."
"That's right," Jesus replied, "you're telling the truth. You don't have a husband. You have already been married five times, and the man you are now living with isn't your husband."
When I read that, I do not see much condemnation. I do not see him preaching the Law at her. From Rhea's comment about "go tell your husband" ..... this comes AFTER he offers her living water. Then not to "nit pick" because I think that repentance and forgiveness is very important, but I do not see that in the conversation.
So, my questions are the following:
- do you have to preach the law?
- does the law have to be shown before grace is offered?
- can a person receive grace then show repentance?
- where are biblical examples of grace first?
- where are examples of law first?
The thoughts and writings on this blog are the thoughts of Jeff and do not necessarily represent the views of Grace First Parish of Russell and/or Lutheran Campus Ministry of Southwest Minnesota State University.
11 comments:
Rhea here. First, I want to apologise for implying that you were rude (or not worth conversing with). I honestly wasn't reading all the comments very thoroughly (there were just too many, and it didn't interest me enough to be honest). So, sorry for not being all that friendly and Christ-like.
Second, I think that this woman already KNEW the Law, so Jesus did not have to specifically go through the 10 Commandments (or any other parts of the Law). The thing today is that we live in such a "relative" world, that it seems that NOTHING is actually "wrong" or "sinful."
Also, regarding how Jesus says "Hey, I've got living water and you need it" (the Rhea paraphrase ;-) ) BEFORE brining up her sin, I think that he did that b/c she didn't know who He was. What I mean is....she had NO CLUE that He had anything that she needed. He needed to let her know that. So He did....and then she's like, "Hey....this sounds good....how about getting me some of that"...to which He "reminds" her of the Law (more specifically, her breaking it).
I think of it like this: Jesus goes "Hey, I've got something AMAZING that you're REALLY going to want/need." Woman says "Really? What is it?" "Well, first you need to understand the bad news....that you have a need............"
Does that make sense? Basically, I see that's what's happening with Jesus at the well.
Rhea:
First, thanks for coming over here after I gave you a heads up on the post.
Secondly, thanks for the apology. I greatly appreciate it and I forgive you. I think that we are closer than most think and am very willing to converse with those from different perspectives.
I appreciate your thoughts on the passages and what might be occurring. I would be interested in hearing your take on why she already "knew the law" and Jesus did not have to do it.
I also think this passage from romans could be discussed to see about the timing of law and grace:
All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.
Could these versus show that people have the law written on their hearts so we can show them God's grace and when they accept the grace, they will be convicted and want to "live by the law"
I follow what you are saying, but I do not see the "bad news" that you are referring to in his conversation with her. If you have time (or someone else) could unpack that and show me, I would greatly appreciate it.
I am also thinking of other conversations which I will post later: Nicodemus, Zachiest and more ...
Thanks again.
As far as her already "knowing" the Law, I've been told that as a Samaritan, she would have believed/known the first 5 (I think) books of the OT, as this is what the Samaritans believed.
This goes to something that I posted on a while back. The gist of the post was that people already know if they are doing right or wrong. They may not admit it, but they know. The person who is robing the bank doesn't have to be told that robing the bank is wrong, he already knows that. Now, if you had proof that driving a car was a sin, and people didn't know it, then I can see telling them. But as it stands God gives us the ability to know right from wrong.
Wondering, with anticipation, just cos...
WW ;)
Nator:
I see where you are going and I was thinking about a "lite" comparrison with my desire to change my eating style, become healthier and lose weight.
I did not do this become someone laid out all the negative and hard facts. But it changed when I shown an 'alternative' ending. Not sure if that small comment makes sense w/o it being flushed out.
Rhea:
I am not sure if I would fully agree with the Samaritan teaching that you would hold to.
However, I thank-you for giving your position and the reasoning behind it.
I do find it interesting that in the comment, you seem to acknowledge that He did not give a full law recourse to her.
I would then take the next step is to say that as Nator hinted, and the scripture that I provided, I think God has written on our hearts.
Thus, when we show the fruits of the spirit and individuals are met with that, they can receive grace and the grace will reveal the areas that need repentance.
Jeff:
I guess that I might be best described as having a somewhat "middle ground" view on whether the Law must be preached before Grace. I want to say "yes," but in saying that I mean that someone must have some sort of understanding of the Law, and that they've broken it first, for the person to "get" Grace (as in understand it). Now, I don't necessarily believe that I must PERSONALLY tell someone the Law in detail before explaining Grace to them. Perhaps someone has already shown them the Law....perhaps from talking with the person, I realise that somehow, that person has a decent understanding of the Law....they realise that they are not good....if that is the case, then I can go straight into Grace.
Now, I might "think" that they get the Law, but I might not be completely sure, so I might simply try to remind them of it, or do a "Reader's Digest" abridged version to jog their memory, before jumping into Grace.
I do believe that we have somewhat of an inherent understanding of "right and wrong." The problem nowadays (or my biggest concern at least) is that with so much "relativism" being preached in society today, that while internally, someone goes "this is wrong, yet I'm doing it....I'm a law-breaker" yet when society as a whole tells this person that what they're doing is okay, I think that it's easy to get confused, and rely on society over your own conscious. In that case, I'd want to try to talk with the person in a little more detail about the Law. Specifically mention the 10 Commandments...talk about how God can make the rules b/c He created us...and that these rules are there b/c God knows what we were created for....He knows what we need to be doing to work at our best....then show them how they've broken the Law (in a loving way), and then present Grace.
Does this make sense? "Make sense" as in do you understand better my position?
Good discussion.
And Rhea, I get bothered by so many "adamant" and unchangeable views being preached in society as well.
I think Jeff is just trying to point out how Jesus actually lived out the life He said we should be living.
Even when Jesus pointed out the Samaritan woman's fault, He didn't shove the 10 commandments in her face and shame the heck out of her. He kindly asked her to get her husband. He knew she didn't have one, but let her see it herself. He could have said, "Thou adulterous wench! You have slept with one who is not thy husband! Don't you see that you need me?!"
And then she would have thought, "Whoa! Another guy hitting on me! I MUST be quite the looker!" :)
Truth in LOVE.
Its key to helping others understand God and His love.
Rhea:
Thanks for your comments. I believe that your thoughts on law and grace can be compared to the planting, watering ... etc ...
I agree with the majority of what you said and I fully make sense 'understand' your position and why you are there.
I was an individual that was law heavy and law first for many years. However, as I look at Scripture and particularly Jesus, I do not see him operating from the LAW model.
Roland:
It is a very good discussion and I appreciate hearing views and for us trying to see where/how/why people come up with different views.
I think your analysis of Jesus and the Samaritan woman is very good.
In the conversation, I do not see her beating her up, but I see him offering her what she needed.
Post a Comment