As I continue searching across the Net for a sound New Covenant rebuttal of Farley, I’ve yet to find one.

Keep up the good, just, and holy work, Andrew!!!

I was given this book as a gift. I must say that I was also pretty skeptical. I feared it was just another “What does Jesus mean today?”/”Let’s redefine the gospel in a way that justifies my tolerant lifestyle” product of this “emerging”/”emergent” (or whatever you want to call it) movement. I gave it a chance because it was given to me by someone who I am confident does not buy into such a thing—someone I would consider quite “conservative” when it comes to such things. (How humbling it is to see an 86-year-old man still actively striving to better his understanding of the Word while some of us [read: me] often sit thinking that we have it figured out!)

Almost one-third of the way into the book, I still found myself saying: “OK. I get your point; but aren’t you taking it a bit far? Doesn’t the New Testament say that the Law is still a good guideline. You seem to be implying that I can act however I want, and everything will be dandy.” This is the same vibe that I’ve been left with at the end of several books I’ve read in the past few years. Sirrod: I was very much so in your boat. What I have to say to you is: READ THE BOOK. Dr. Farley ended up addressing every question I had—and more—and it would take my copying of all 240 pages here to explain why you are misunderstanding him. It really is entirely unfair to try to understand so much from such a brief interview.

An important point that this books makes is the importance of reading scripture correctly in context (again, contrary to above accusations by someone who did not read the book). For so long, (though I wouldn’t admit it to myself) I used the Bible as a collection of proverbs; separated into nice little verses for me to grab one when I so pleased and use it in an argument to prove my point. Even ignoring the fact that the verse/chapter/”testament” divisions are artificial: what an immature way to treat the Word! I often hear believers trying to justify that it is OK that the Bible is full of contradictions; but I find that when I “unlearn” everything I think I know about my “handy little book of proverbs for daily living” and actually read passages in context—knowing who wrote them to whom and for what reason—every contradiction I have found regarding the Gospel is resolved.

As this book points out, reading the Word this way reveals that the message is quite simple and well defined without contradiction. I think the trouble for some (read: me) is (was) that the roots of the “mixed Gospel” that I had previously been exposed to for so many years run so deep that it takes some effort to truly approach the Word with a fresh mind again and see it with the simplicity that was intended.

———————————————-

This would be a nice ending to my little “2¢”, but the engineer in my blood can’t let me stop with out addressing a couple of things.

Sirrod; you stated, in response to Dr. Farley’s statement about the Sabbath with:

“This is an absolutely absurd statement. Again the Law points us to Christ for justification. As Christians we observe the Sabbath by being in Christ. Jesus is our Sabbath. We are justified because we are in Christ.”

I knew that logical inconsistency was coming as soon as I saw that your argument started with, “This is absurd…” It is not logically sound to argue that something isn’t true because it sounds/seems ridiculous, and starting an argument that way just proves your lack of confidence in what will follow. In all fairness, you did attempt somewhat of a justification after the “absurd” statement, but it is utterly flawed. You can not use our justification in Christ to excuse strict and literal adherence to one commandment without doing so to all of the others. Let me take your exact statement, but switch commandments:

Again the Law points us to Christ for justification. As Christians we “don’t murder” by being in Christ. Jesus is our lack of murder. We are justified [in our murderous actions] because we are in Christ.

As Dr. Farley (to be fair: he is reiterating what Paul said long ago) has said countless times (in the book and in this discussion): if we put our focus on “measuring” our sin rather than on living in Christ, we will indefinitely fall victim to this sin. The point of the New Covenant is not “what can we get away with?”, it is “what can Christ do through me?” When you focus on Christ instead of sin, you won’t have a choice but to live a less sinful life. The Law forces one to focus on sin, and it is intended to.

One more brief point. You have still not addressed a simple fact: You can’t pick-and-choose which laws you would like to put on your measuring stick. Let’s assume that the Law is in fact intended to be used by believers to know what is and isn’t sin. Then, who gets to filter the list of 600+ laws, picking the ones that are “relevant” to us today? I seriously doubt that you use the length of your beard and the quality of the meat you eat to gauge your morality—whether in (/through the justification of) Christ, or not. There is simply no denying the all-or-nothingness of the the Law, whether used as justification or as a moral measuring stick under the New Covenant.

Here’s a quote from Chapter 8 of The Naked Gospel that I think may help. Reading the book will also help clarify. It’s really hard to understand the message of a 240-page book from a single, short interview.

From The Naked Gospel (Chapter 8):

“Law haters, known as antinomians, have been misinterpreting the Scriptures since the days of the early church. They peddle a false doctrine that the law is evil.

In combating this heresy, the apostle Paul notes that the law isn’t sin. In fact, he declares it to be holy, righteous, and good: “So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good” (Romans 7:12).

So there’s nothing imperfect about the law itself. It’s without blemish. The accurate position on the law is not that it’s flawed. But its perfect standard when combined with human effort results in hopelessness. In short, the law is perfect, but it makes no one perfect.” (from Chapter 8, The Naked Gospel)

—

“Maybe the clearest statement concerning the law’s usefulness today was written to Timothy: “We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. We also know that law is made not for the righteous …” (1 Timothy 1:8–9a).

Here we see a balanced view of the law. The law still exists and has a purpose today. But it’s not designed for Christians as a tool or guide for daily living. Its sole purpose is to convict the ungodly of their spiritually dead state.” (from Chapter 8, The Naked Gospel)

—

Hope this helps! It’s really hard to know what any book fully says without reading it. But I can tell you that I could easily sign a Baptist statement of faith, for example. The Christian’s freedom from the Law and its simultaneous usefulness to point out sin is a pretty mainstream doctrine.

Grace to you all!

Andrew

Unfortunately, when I read Mr Farly’s entries, I heard angry, hateful resentful rhetoric and a strong lack of compassion/judgment to people of *weaker faith ( Romans 14:1) because he’s right and everyone else, in “the faith”, are wrong!!

I clearly hear him elevating himself for having fresh new revelation and enjoying his put-downs to those who love and follow Jesus Christ, with their whole heart;eager to do so, for that matter! But….They all have it wrong and have had it wrong for centuries?
No-one has it right! Do they Mr Farley~except you!?!

Now that you aren’t depressed, because, “you understand”…. your anger isn’t inward anymore, it’s outward!! Depression is inward anger!
FYI~Works will make you depressed; WHEN and especially when, you do them out of obligation and not LOVE!!
Your gift my friend, is not Evangelism. Perhaps it is Piety!!
Your revelation is not based on Love, or Whole of the Scriptures.

You have taken scriptures out of their context, to not be accountable, to not have boundaries in life, and to live as you see fit! It is all about ‘YOU’ isn’t it?

I write these things knowing, it will not change you, because NOW you are in too deep and not open to anything except your translation, (what scripture refers to as the pride of life)”The Gospel according to Farly”.

I pray you truly awaken to Grace, Compassion, to Love, and to Humility, because undeniably, Jesus was the full embodiment to Grace and Truth (John 1:14) and many were drawn to Him, because of just that.

*(Be willing to) Accept him whose Faith is Weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters.

One view is that the Mosaic Law, or a select part of it, is needed as a moral guideline for the Christian’s daily life. The other view is that the Christian should have no relationship with the Law after salvation and that the indwelling Christ, the fruit of His Spirit (love, patience, self-control, etc.), and New Testament behavior verses are sufficient to guide a Christian’s daily life.

Only one of these two views can possibly be Scriptural, and the other view should not find any support at all. In fact, the inaccurate view should require a
“re-writing” of Scripture.

Below are just a few Scriptural facts concerning the Christian’s relationship to the Law:

1) We Christians died to the Law. (Romans 7:4; Galatians 2:19)
2) We Christians are not under the Law. (Galatians 5:18; Romans 6:14)
3) We Christians are not supervised by the Law. (Galatians 3:25)
4) We Christians are not perfected by the Law. (Galatians 3:2-3)
5) We Christians shouldn’t even live by rules. (Colossians 2:20-23)

Based on the passages above, what kind of relationship do you think we Christians should have with the Law?

To claim that the Law is intended to guide a Christian’s daily life requires a re-writing of Scripture. Essentially, it requires taking all of the above passages and adding the phrase “for salvation only” to each one.

Examples of this rewriting of Scripture would be: “we died to the law for salvation only,” “we are not under the Law for salvation only,” etc. These theological gymnastics simply display our lack of confidence in Jesus for every ounce of daily living.

Immorality is not a concern if we depend on the indwelling Christ for our daily lives. Jesus is not passive. Jesus in us is not passive. We are told very clearly of the life He will produce: love, patience, gentleness, self-control, etc. And as Galatians says, “against such things there is no law.” (Galatians 5:23)

For example, we don’t need to worry about committing adultery if we are walking in love for our husband or wife. We don’t need to worry about sexual sins if we are walking in the self-control that Jesus produces.

However, we have reason to worry if we are relying on the Law as our guide for daily living. In Romans 7, we see the result of Paul’s best effort in trying to “not covet.” Note that “Thou shalt not covet” is one of the Ten Commandments. And the result in Paul’s life was “coveting of every kind!”

So what’s the solution? “But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law.” (Galatians 5:18) I think Paul would ask us today: When it comes to daily living, who is leading you?

Jesus is enough, for salvation, and for daily living. Any reliance on the law, or rules, is spiritual adultery. Romans 7 speaks of our death to the Law, our marriage to Jesus, and our reliance on Him for bearing fruit on a daily basis:

“Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God.” (Romans 7:4)

How do we bear fruit for God? Through our death to the Law. How do we bear fruit for God? Through our marriage to Jesus Christ. Why cheat on Jesus when He will produce the upright living that being guided by the Law never could?

If having no relationship with the Law and depending exclusively on Jesus for daily living is naïve and absurd, I am privileged to be naïve and honored to be absurd.

Jesus plus nothing.