Dear Mike

I have just downloaded the law of Moses vs. the law of the Spirit.

A question – what do you think of A E Knoch?

Do you agree with his view on the Trinity?

What do you think of William Law and his teaching on law and grace, in “Justification by faith”?

I have just in the last week started reading the writings of some of the Universalists!

I feel as if it harmonizes the Scriptures better than the traditional views.

Yours Sincerely

K____

Hi K____,

You ask ” what do you think of A. E. Knoch?”

By the time you finish reading that paper on ‘The Law of Moses Versus The Law of The Spirit,’ you will see that other than universal reconciliation, A. E. Knoch and I have very little in common. His unscriptural doctrine of ‘two administrations’ is one of the most insidiously misleading doctrines that are out there. Mr. Knoch’s understanding of the doctrine of ‘grace’ is without basis in scripture.

To him, grace is merely a noun, describing what Christ did for you at Calvary. He was completely blinded to the truth that:

Rom 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

To Mr. Knoch this verse does not mean that you now have dominion over sin in this life, as Paul thrice repeats in this chapter of Romans. What this 14th verse of Rom 6 means to those who subscribe to Mr. Knoch’s ‘two administrations’ doctrine, is that no matter what you do or don’t do, Christ’s death and resurrection have secured your position as worthy of being in the first resurrection with all others who have accepted Christ as their Savior. “Ye have fallen from grace,” “take heed lest ye also fall after the same example of unbelief,” “Let him that thinketh he stands, take heed lest he fall,” “Be careful to maintain good works,” etc, etc. etc. are all simply Pauline platitudes with nothing of substance really at stake. According to Mr. Knoch all these endless statements mean is that Paul didn’t want those in his charge to miss out on the joy that was theirs if only they could come to realize that they have to live by no law whatsoever. Statements like:

Rom 8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

… doesn’t mean a thing to those who subscribe to Mr Knoch’s insidious ‘two administration’ doctrine. They are “not under law.” And to them this means no law whatsoever.

If you really want to pursue this subject read my exchanges with A___ in the letters section of the web page. The letter is entitled ‘The Teachings of A. E. Knoch Versus The Teachings of Christ.’ If you have difficulty finding it, simply use the on- site google feature to make it easier.

You asked about the trinity. Come to think of it, I believe that Mr. Knoch and I are very close in our thinking on that subject. However, he does not understand that ‘the Comforter’ and Christ are one and the same, inasmuch as “All that the Father has He has given unto me.” This statement certainly included God’s spirit and the ability to give it to others. Read the paper I have posted entitled, ‘Is God Indeed A Trinity?’ on the web page for more on this subject.

Finally, you asked what I thought about William Law’s teachings on law and grace in “Justification By Faith?”

Though I haven’t read that particular book, I will say that I have gotten much from William Law, and have much respect for many of his writings. I don’t know what he teaches in that book because I haven’t seen the book. But I believe that by the time you finish that paper on the ‘Law of Moses Versus The Law of God,’ you will know what I think on this subject. I think of myself as being grounded in the scriptures, but I have proved that I am willing to change when I am proven wrong. I wrote and distributed a paper on the law at a Bible Conference in Mobile, Alabama. When I returned from that conference I had an e- mail from a woman in Michigan showing me that I was wrong about my stance on that subject. I told every single person to whom I had given that paper, to either burn that piece of heresy or send it back to me so that I could burn it. This paper you are reading is the result of that lady’s paper showing me that you cannot spiritualize the old covenant. “… The piece taken out of the new agrees not with the old.”

Luk 5:36 And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.
Luk 5:37 And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.
Luk 5:38 But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.

The law of Moses is “preserved,” as stated here, or “established” as in Rom 3:31 only if we keep them completely separated and allow the law, generation by generation, as a “schoolmaster” to “bring us to Christ.” But after we have been brought to Christ, we are “no longer under the schoolmaster.” So what should be done with a faithful “schoolmaster, after he has finished his service to us? Should we turn around and shoot him, because we no longer need a ‘schoolmaster? No, we allow him to continue to do what he is designed to do for “the whole world.”

Rom 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

This is the function of the law; to show us our sins and to bring us to Christ. It is “established” to do that in every generation. Here are the scriptures:

Gal 3:1 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
Gal 3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
Gal 3:3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh? [ Keeping the “law… for the lawless”]
1Ti 1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
Gal 3:19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added [ to the yet unrevealed, never changing, ‘law of the spirit’] because of transgressions,[ only] till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
Gal 3:20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.
Gal 3:21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
Gal 3:22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
Gal 3:23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
Gal 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
Gal 3:25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

And what are the consequences of failing to see all this?:

Gal 4:1 Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all;
Gal 4:2 But is under tutors and governors [ the ‘schoolmaster,’ the ‘law’] until the time appointed of the father.
Gal 4:3 Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: [ the ‘law of Moses,’ “not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless”].

So the penalty of remaining “under tutors and governors” is that we are still under “bondage.”

And what is the penalty of remaining “in bondage,” under the law? Same chapter:

Gal 4:30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for th e son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
Gal 4:31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

Read that paper you downloaded. It will answer a lot of questions you might have on this subject. It is so long because it is very thorough.

I believe that it would be even more helpful if you would first read, ‘Biblical Examples of Rightly Dividing The Word.’

If we understand God’s Word in any way other than the way in which Christ and His apostles understood it, we will be in error.

Let me hear from you again.

In His service,

Mike