What is meant by the letter kills?

Hi moe_mac, how are you?

When I think of the verse you mentioned in the title of this thread, I think also of the Lord's words in Matthew 12:7

[b][color=660033]But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.[/color][/b]

Chris

What did he mean when he said he would remove the candlestick. Some translation say lamp stand instead OF CANDLESTICK . Did he mean HIS SPIRIT from the church ?

[u]How did they leave their first love?[/u]
John 14:15-17
15 "If you love me, you will obey what I command. 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever- 17 the Spirit of truth.

To understand this question we need to take a step back a ways and look at the mindset of many of the Pharisees. We also need to understand some historical things. Ephesus was believed to have been visited for a significant amount of time by John the Apostle. It is also believed that Paul wrote I Corinthians from there. John was big on love. Paul wrote the great love chapter I Cor. 13 from Ephesus. How is it that some 20 or 30 years later- this church had left their 'first love'; or if I might so say- "the love they had at first"?

The Pharisees and Sadducees were notorious for trying to establsh themselves with distinction. The Sadducees were the aristrocratic type and exalted themselves with their prestige. The Pharisees were the learned group that had taken it upon themselves to be the protectors of the Law. They viewed themselves as exalted over common folk. To them the common people were ignorant and 'sinners'. They even accused Jesus of being ignorant. At one point they even backhandedly asked Him (who IS the Word of God) if He even knew 'letters' or as we could say 'grammar' (John 7:15). It was this same word [i]gramma[/i] that is translated as the 'letter' that kills in II Cor. 3:6. It was here that the Pharisees had placed their trust, but more importantly [i]made their name[/i].

The Pharisees set the 'gramma' up against the Word. They did this to maintain their [i]position[/i] in society. For years they had been called, Rabbi, Rabbi, and loved the chief seats. They loved to be seen of men. They loved the praise of men. They found their sense of meaning in the accolades and reverence they received from the people. They acquired much of this reverence by presenting themselves as the ones who know the 'gramma'. They tried to depict themselves as tight-knit with God. They spent a tremendous amount of time patting each other on the back re-enforcing this sense of exaltation over the people. And in this they divided the worship between them and God. What do you suppose happened when the Son of God came on the scene? They lost their repore with the people and were willing to do almost anything to keep it from slipping through their fingers.

Often people ask the question, "why didn't most of the Pharisees believe?" His words were oracles and deeds were miracles. They knew the water was turned to wine by Jesus. He had walked on water. He had fed the multitudes. He had spit in the ground and made an eyeball and a man could see. He healed the lame. He raised Lazarus from the dead. So why did they not believe? Jesus frames the answer to this in the form of a question:

How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only? (John 5:44)

They fed off this honour that they received from one another. It must have fed their ego and sense of self-worth. Understand the grip that this 'receiving of honour' had on these men; they were even willing to blaspheme the Holy Spirit in order to sabotage the faith of those who were turning their attention and reverence away from the Pharisees and towards Christ. They 'blasphemed God' in order to retain the praises of men. Sound familiar?

The miracles, according to John's Gospel, had long since established Christ as Messiah. There was no reasonable doubt. Even Nicodemas in John 7 demonstrated how God was with Christ. Did they hear him? What did they ask him? "Are you deceived also?" They knew that the whole world believed on Him. They had to do something!

If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both [u]our place[/u] and nation.(John 11:48)

The word here for 'place' is [i]topos[/i] or 'spot'. The Romans will come and take our [b]spot[/b]. We know historically that this never happened and that after the Pharisees fled to Jamnia in 70AD when war broke out a certain sect of the Pharisees actually worked [u]with[/u] the Roman authorities to seize control over the all dissenters (i.e. the Nicodemas's and Paul's of the Pharisees; see Daniel Gruber's works). From here they established Rabbinic Judaism.

And this is the issue that brings us to the church at Ephesus. [u]What[/u] or [u]who[/u] was turning the hearts of the people away from Christ and upon themselves? What or who was [u]dividing the worship[/u] and shifting the focus off of Christ? The Ephesians were a very learned group of Christians. They had had the best of the best in teachers and doctrine. Yet, knowledge puffs up and in time the danger is found in believeing that one can do without the consel of God. Soon folk feel they can exalt themselves in the congregation. A power struggle begins.

But I trust in the Lord Jesus to send Timotheus shortly unto you, that I also may be of good comfort, when I know your state. For I have no man likeminded, who will naturally care for your state. [u]For all seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ's.[/u] (Philip. 2)

This was not a new problem. Men have 'sought their own' in the name of God for hundreds of years. And this is what gets teh candlestick in jeopardy. When men assemble and seek their own. Even when they assemble in the name of God and read the bible. These are accesories of their efforts. They have an agenda- and it's not God's. Running parallel to this the Rabbi's said in effect - we have the authority- we have the book- why do we need God? We can express our religion in God's absence and still call ourselves the people of God; when truly, the thing that defines any people as God's people is whether or not God is [u]among[/u] them. This is the people whose praise is not of people - but of God. This is the true Circumcision.

If Christ is not front and center then Christ will remove the Candlestick. Will He share His glory? Will He allow HIS Church to operate without Him? Will He tolerate the notion that people can go on with their services without consulting Him for direction? Will they come together as an assembly (ekklesia) with 'expectations' rather than an faith filled [i]expectancy[/i]? The Candlestick is representative, I think, of the moving and edification of the Holy Spirit in the midst of and [i]through[/i] the people on an individual level. Can we be lights in the World if Christ give us no candlestick, oil and flame?

Brother Moe-mac wrote:

The Pharisees also added to His Old Testament laws.

Paul writes...

Rom 10:2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.

3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.

If one looks to Psalm 119 we find that there is a knowledge that truly does lead one to God's righteousness, but in the case of Paul's generation they (as you have stated above) "went about to establish their own righteousness."

The difference between the Psalmist of 119 and Paul's generation is that Paul's generation did not submit "themselves unto the righteousness of God."

The generations of Paul's began to establish the 'Mishna" which in my view resembles much of what "dispensational and systematic theology" teaches today. Both, by the doctrines of men, lead people away from allowing the Holy Scripture to speak to the individual.

It is today, as it was then, men get lost in the study of minute details of grammar and systems of theology and fail to enter into a relationship with our Savior and allow Him to teach His ways. They write books, they start seminaries, they charge huge sums of money to teach others what they have created.

Only by feeding on the pure milk of the word of God is one able to grow in spiritual discernment. Only by feeding on the curds and honey of the word of God does one begin to understand what is good and know to reject what is evil.

This is the pure way...

David submitted to the righteousness of God...

Psa 19:7 The law of the LORD [is] perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD [is] sure, making wise the simple.

8 The statutes of the LORD [are] right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD [is] pure, enlightening the eyes.

9 The fear of the LORD [is] clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD [are] true [and] righteous altogether.

10 More to be desired [are they] than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.

11 Moreover by them is thy servant warned: [and] in keeping of them [there is] great reward.

12 Who can understand [his] errors? cleanse thou me from secret [faults].

13 Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous [sins]; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression.

14 Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer.

What David wrote above speaks to God placing His word in David's heart.

In Christ
Jeff

Bro. Jeff's: The generations of Paul's began to establish the 'Mishna" which in my view resembles much of what "dispensational and systematic theology" teaches today. Both, by the doctrines of men, lead people away from allowing the Holy Scripture to speak to the individual.

I think this is true. Certainly the Rabbi's reserved the right to interpret everything from the scripture to a dream a person may have had. They do not believe in what Luther called, "The priesthood of all believers."

It is today, as it was then, men get lost in the study of minute details of grammar and systems of theology and fail to enter into a relationship with our Savior and allow Him to teach His ways. They write books, they start seminaries, they charge huge sums of money to teach others what they have created.

I think this is true also. I recall Leonard Ravenhill in the interview saying that folk need to be asked if they [i]know God[/i]. Jesus talks in John often about what it meant to know the Father and how that through much study the Pharisee's still did not know Him. When they saw the Word personified they did not recognise Him.

It seems to me that the reason this was is the same as what we read about Moses coming down from the mountain. The people wanted a vail on Moses' face. Why? One would think that if a person carried in their face the residue of God's glory folk would line up to get a piece of the action. But they did not. They did not want to look upon even the afterglow of God's glory. So they took the covenant and rejected the glory. And there is no wonder they never saw God in His own word.

Hi Gary,

I was water baptized again because the first time was only counted as a bath.

;-) I can relate to that.

As they say in Nascar. I guess I haven't found the groove my car runs best in yet. Thanks again for taking time to cover that question for me and the SI gang.

Well, sometimes there is a lot of preparation for what He ultimately has in store. But, in the mean time, He'll use us anytime we make ourselves available I suspect. "Availability" is as good of abilty as any.

Lots of wonderful folks here on SI to help shed light on things. Lots of resourses. Lots of perspectives. :-)

Reply
I would like to thank each of you for seeking and sharing with us as you would your first love, the members of your own family.

Matthew 12
46. While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him.
47. Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.
48. But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?
49. And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
50. For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

Don't you just love being a member of the family of God?

Eddie

"Can we have a rebel gospel that don’t line up with the word?"

Yes. Just simply preach without studying what the Bible says. Much of this going on today. Men preaching tradition instead of Bible.

"What is meant in the above by the letter kills?"

The letter, God's Law, the Holy Writings of God, in themselves, do nothing but condemn us. We cannot perfectly fulfill God's commands to the letter. And by this I don't mean that because God says "preach the gospel" that we can't preach the gospel; I mean that you won't always preach the right word, you won't always preach to the right people, you won't properly pray for the preaching you do. For the Christian or the unsaved, God's Word, His written letter, will be the standard of our judgment. The unsaved will be cast into hell according to the Law; the saved will have the wood, hay, and stubble burned away according to the Law. As Ray Comfort says, "the Law doesn't help us, it just leaves us helpless."

Christ, however, is the focus of the Law (the letter), and the fulfillment of Law, and the Spirit He has given according to the Law takes these imperfect works of the saints, and sanctifies them, using us in His service, not because of what we do, but because of what He did. So it is not the writings of God that help us, but God Himself is our Helper. The Bible does not personally provide for us, the God of the Bible is our Provision, etc, etc.

I think about how that Bible says that even the Lord's Table can be a snare and a trap (Rom 11:9). God's Word can be also. We don't worship the Bible, but the God that the Bible directs us to. So those Ephesians, just as we do today, got into obeying the letter out of rut and duty, rather than out of love of the letter Writer.

"Are we under the law?"

Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

We cannot be judged to be eternally condemned while trusting in Christ, as His fulfillment of the Law satisfied our payment for sin. However, we when operate outside of faith, as a believer, those things will be burned away at the Judgment Seat of Christ. We will not be burned away, but the unfaithfulness we carry about with us will be, ie: areas of our life that we did not obey God.

"What did he mean when he said he would remove the candlestick."

God will not bring His presence in revival power to fill, anoint, and show Himself strong in these Christians. They will still have the Holy Ghost in measure, but He will not pour His Spirit out upon them, He will not answer some prayers because of their sin (this brings up alot of debate but Isaiah and James made this clear), and they will not find much spiritual progress being made; you know, basically the way the vast majority of churches in America operate today. Without the candlestick you cannot have the flame. So when God's people get right with Him, He restores the candlestick and lights the flame by sending the Holy Ghost.

"How did they leave their first love?"

The key word here is "left". As taught from a Greg Locke sermon, this was a willing act to 'leave' their first love. The were doing all the things God said, but not with the right heart condition. They were preaching, praying, witnessing, etc, but all in the flesh. It was all an outward 'going through the motions' bit. There was not an inner grief for the lost, not a groaning to see God move, not a yearning toward the face of God; but just a robotic obediance to the letter.