Legal or Lawful

[visionary]

What is the difference between the words legal and lawful.

Here is an excerpt from FamGuardian.org about the difference between these two words:

It is crucial to define the difference between legal and lawful. The generic Constitution references genuine law. The present civil authorities and their courts use the word legal. Is there a difference in the meanings? The following is quoted from A Dictionary of Law 1893:

Lawful. In accordance with the law of the land; according to the law; permitted, sanctioned, or justified by law. “Lawful” properly implies a thing conformable to or enjoined by law; “Legal”, a thing in the form or after the manner of law or binding by law. A writ or warrant issuing from any court, under color of law, is a “legal” process however defective. See legal. [Bold emphasis added]

Legal. Latin legalis. Pertaining to the understanding, the exposition, the administration, the science and the practice of law: as, the legal profession, legal advice; legal blanks, newspaper. Implied or imputed in law. Opposed to actual

“Legal” looks more to the letter [form/appearance], and “Lawful” to the spirit [substance/content], of the law. “Legal” is more appropriate for conformity to positive rules of law; “Lawful” for accord with ethical principle. “Legal” imports rather that the forms [appearances] of law are observed, that the proceeding is correct in method, that rules prescribed have been obeyed; “Lawful” that the right is actful in substance, that moral quality is secured. “Legal” is the antithesis of equitable, and the equivalent of constructive. 2 Abbott’s Law Dic. 24. [Bold emphasis added]

In simple terms, something that is lawful is above something that is legal. If something is legal, it does not necessary mean that it is lawful. Lawful is more about natural rights and legal is more about rights given by man or the government.

 

[visionary]

Remember hearers of the law are not justified, doers are... that is being lawful

 

[TurtleHare]

Are we justified by what we do or by what the Savior has done? I don't think I can do anything to get myself justified in God's eyes.

 

[psalms 91]

You cant, we want to do good works because of Him in us not in order to gain any rightweousness

 

[Brighten04]

Remember hearers of the law are not justified, doers are... that is being lawful

The law says it is not lawful to eat ham.
Grace says eat ham and be thankful for it.

 

[visionary]

The law says it is not lawful to eat ham.
Grace says eat ham and be thankful for it.

I like to see where in scripture grace said that.

 

[Brighten04]

I like to see where in scripture grace said that.

Romans 14:2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.

4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.

7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself.

8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.

9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.

Apostle Paul contended with Apostle Peter regarding this very thing. The Gentiles were known for eating pork in that day. Peter apparently enjoyed a ham sandwich with the Gentile believers UNTIL those law keepers showed up.

I like the NIV for this
Gal. 2:11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.

14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?

15 “We who are Jews by birth and not sinful Gentiles 16 know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in[d] Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified.

17 “But if, in seeking to be justified in Christ, we Jews find ourselves also among the sinners, doesn’t that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! 18 If I rebuild what I destroyed, then I really would be a lawbreaker.

19 “For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!”

 

[visionary]

Romans 14:2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.

4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.

7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself.

8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.

9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.

Apostle Paul contended with Apostle Peter regarding this very thing. The Gentiles were known for eating pork in that day. Peter apparently enjoyed a ham sandwich with the Gentile believers UNTIL those law keepers showed up.

I like the NIV for this
Gal. 2:11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.

14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?

15 “We who are Jews by birth and not sinful Gentiles 16 know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in[d] Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified.

17 “But if, in seeking to be justified in Christ, we Jews find ourselves also among the sinners, doesn’t that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! 18 If I rebuild what I destroyed, then I really would be a lawbreaker.

19 “For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!”

and how is this outside of God's dietary laws?

 

[visionary]

According to the 1893 Dictionary of Arts and Sciences, and general literature / The R. S. Peale 9th Encyclopedia Britannica, the word legal means “the undoing of God’s law.”

 

[pinacled]

Romans 14:2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.

4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.

7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself.

8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.

9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.

Apostle Paul contended with Apostle Peter regarding this very thing. The Gentiles were known for eating pork in that day. Peter apparently enjoyed a ham sandwich with the Gentile believers UNTIL those law keepers showed up.

I like the NIV for this
Gal. 2:11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.

14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?

15 “We who are Jews by birth and not sinful Gentiles 16 know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in[d] Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified.

17 “But if, in seeking to be justified in Christ, we Jews find ourselves also among the sinners, doesn’t that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! 18 If I rebuild what I destroyed, then I really would be a lawbreaker.

19 “For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!”

You have to remember Paul was Torah raised and taught. Sometimes he is speaking in mysteries. Have you heard of Midrash?

 

[Brighten04]

You have to remember Paul was Torah raised and taught. Sometimes he is speaking in mysteries. Have you heard of Midrash?

No. What is that?

 

[Brighten04]

and how is this outside of God's dietary laws?

Eat what is put before you without questioning and give thanks, ham sandwich or hamburger.

1 Corinthians 10:27
If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.

 

[visionary]

Paul being the pharisee that he is, doesn't have in mind what you are suggesting. That would be outside his faith.

 

[Brighten04]

Paul being the pharisee that he is, doesn't have in mind what you are suggesting. That would be outside his faith.

No! He is a Christian now, no longer a Pharisee.He is free to choose being no longer under law. But Paul made his choices based on what was going to edify his hearers.

Romans 14:19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.

20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.

21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

Here is the NIV

Romans 14:19 Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. 20 Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a person to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. 21 It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother or sister to fall.

22 So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who does not condemn himself by what he approves. 23 But whoever has doubts is condemned if they eat, because their eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

Here is the Message
Romans 14:19-21 So let’s agree to use all our energy in getting along with each other. Help others with encouraging words; don’t drag them down by finding fault. You’re certainly not going to permit an argument over what is served or not served at supper to wreck God’s work among you, are you? I said it before and I’ll say it again: All food is good, but it can turn bad if you use it badly, if you use it to trip others up and send them sprawling. When you sit down to a meal, your primary concern should not be to feed your own face but to share the life of Jesus. So be sensitive and courteous to the others who are eating. Don’t eat or say or do things that might interfere with the free exchange of love.

22-23 Cultivate your own relationship with God, but don’t impose it on others. You’re fortunate if your behavior and your belief are coherent. But if you’re not sure, if you notice that you are acting in ways inconsistent with what you believe—some days trying to impose your opinions on others, other days just trying to please them—then you know that you’re out of line. If the way you live isn’t consistent with what you believe, then it’s wrong.

So Paul would not offend any host of his if they served him a ham sandwich. He would give thanks and eat it.

 

[psalms 91]

Yes, Paul was many things to many people and yes he would not have chosen to eat ham but if put before him he would have as God showed that all things are lawful however, not all things are good for us

 

[Brighten04]

Yes, Paul was many things to many people and yes he would not have chosen to eat ham but if put before him he would have as God showed that all things are lawful however, not all things are good for us

I think he would practice what he preached.1 Corinthians 10:27
If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.

 

[visionary]

No! He is a Christian now, no longer a Pharisee..... <snip>....

Not according to his testimony before the courts towards the end of his ministry and life.

Acts 23:6 But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.

Acts 26:5 Which knew me from the beginning, if they would testify, that after the most straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee.

 

[Brighten04]

Not according to his testimony before the courts towards the end of his ministry and life.

Are you saying that Paul was not professing to be a Christian to these people who wanted to kill him? Paul WAS a Pharisee . Remember he wanted to kill Christians.

 

[visionary]

Are you saying that Paul was not professing to be a Christian to these people who wanted to kill him? Paul WAS a Pharisee . Remember he wanted to kill Christians.

He didn't make that distinction. Never once did he declare that he was no longer a Pharisee but a Christian. To him, Pharisee was not a bad attitude towards Christians, it was the doctrines of many of his discourses in letters to the churches. That is where women not wearing men's clothing, wearing covering for their heads, keeping silent in church, rules of adultery, etc. Wanting to be considered fora seat with the Sanhedrin was another matter.

Yeshua may have had issues with the Pharisees, scribes, and Saducees, but mostly over oral traditions that made God's law void. Remember when Yeshua was born he received a special blessing from Hillel the Great's son Simon. His son Gamliel would become the teacher of Paul (Acts 22:3) and would take a tolerant stance toward the Nazarene sect (Acts 5:34) possibly influenced by his father’s earlier blessing of Yehsua. Yeshua teachings is in agreement with the love philosophy of Hillel. Within Rabbinic literature we have record of over 350 disputes between the School of Hillel and the School of Shammai. Generally Shammai gave the stricter interpretation, while Hillels understandings were more relaxed. According to the Jewish religious literature the School of Shammai was based on severity while the School of Hillel was based on grace and mercy. When you realize that there are two schools of thought within the body of Pharisees and take note of the distinctions, then some of the conversations Yeshua had with them makes more sense.

 

[Brighten04]

He didn't make that distinction. Never once did he declare that he was no longer a Pharisee but a Christian. To him, Pharisee was not a bad attitude towards Christians, it was the doctrines of many of his discourses in letters to the churches. That is where women not wearing men's clothing, wearing covering for their heads, keeping silent in church, rules of adultery, etc. Wanting to be considered fora seat with the Sanhedrin was another matter.

Yeshua may have had issues with the Pharisees, scribes, and Saducees, but mostly over oral traditions that made God's law void. Remember when Yeshua was born he received a special blessing from Hillel the Great's son Simon. His son Gamliel would become the teacher of Paul (Acts 22:3) and would take a tolerant stance toward the Nazarene sect (Acts 5:34) possibly influenced by his father’s earlier blessing of Yehsua. Yeshua teachings is in agreement with the love philosophy of Hillel. Within Rabbinic literature we have record of over 350 disputes between the School of Hillel and the School of Shammai. Generally Shammai gave the stricter interpretation, while Hillels understandings were more relaxed. According to the Jewish religious literature the School of Shammai was based on severity while the School of Hillel was based on grace and mercy. When you realize that there are two schools of thought within the body of Pharisees and take note of the distinctions, then some of the conversations Yeshua had with them makes more sense.

I think I am still missing what you are saying here. How can Paul be both a Pharisee and a Christian? He taught that Christians are a new creation in Christ Jesus, whether Jew or Gentile. He was trained as a Pharisee, that is true. But when he met Lord Jesus on the Damascus road he had a conversion experience that warrented a name change from Saul to Paul.