The ten commandments Old covenant, and the law "done away" and "abolished" as paul said

[Meowzltov]

Oh, so now your argument is about numbers, because you see by now the frog and others were right, there were both in the church, and paul wrote to both, so now you want to change modus operandi to percentages....lol

I've always said that there were a negligable amount of Jews there. You are the one who thinks the number of Jews was significant. So now I'm calling you on the numbers. Go ahead. I await with baited breath.

 

[Athée]

As a curious bystander...

Why is it that no one has mentioned Matthew 5 17-19. I think this verse makes things pretty clear. Christians are not justified by keeping the law. That only happens through the work of Jesus but Jesus is pretty clear that Christians are meant to follow the law as a way of righteous living.

 

[Sophrosyne]

As a curious bystander...

Why is it that no one has mentioned Matthew 5 17-19. I think this verse makes things pretty clear. Christians are not justified by keeping the law. That only happens through the work of Jesus but Jesus is pretty clear that Christians are meant to follow the law as a way of righteous living.

I would suggest you consider verse 20

20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Now Christians don't have Pharisees so you would have to say that this whole speech was to a crowd of Jews who were already under the Law, not to Gentile believers.

 

[Athée]

I would suggest you consider verse 20

20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Now Christians don't have Pharisees so you would have to say that this whole speech was to a crowd of Jews who were already under the Law, not to Gentile believers.

That is a really interesting point. I am not sure we can speculate with any authority about the exact make up of the crowd that day. Regardless of who was there that day though, the message still stands. Jesus appears to be saying that the attempts of the Pharisees to obey all the law were insufficient, but it was worse than that... They were not even close because as Jesus came to demonstrate and explain, obeying the law is also about your heart.
You have heard it said... But I say to you...
In each case Jesus is actually explaining how much more rigorous the law is than even the Pharisees thought. What we can not say based on verse 20, is that it somehow invalidates what Jesus himself has just said. Jesus says that living according to all the details of the law is still the righteous way to live, that he then goes on to explain just how hard that is does not countermand what he has just said.

Thoughts?

 

[Meowzltov]

As a curious bystander...

Why is it that no one has mentioned Matthew 5 17-19. I think this verse makes things pretty clear. Christians are not justified by keeping the law. That only happens through the work of Jesus but Jesus is pretty clear that Christians are meant to follow the law as a way of righteous living.

Because verse 19 seems to say the opposite of your point. Thanks for the reference.

 

[Sophrosyne]

That is a really interesting point. I am not sure we can speculate with any authority about the exact make up of the crowd that day. Regardless of who was there that day though, the message still stands. Jesus appears to be saying that the attempts of the Pharisees to obey all the law were insufficient, but it was worse than that... They were not even close because as Jesus came to demonstrate and explain, obeying the law is also about your heart.
You have heard it said... But I say to you...
In each case Jesus is actually explaining how much more rigorous the law is than even the Pharisees thought. What we can not say based on verse 20, is that it somehow invalidates what Jesus himself has just said. Jesus says that living according to all the details of the law is still the righteous way to live, that he then goes on to explain just how hard that is does not countermand what he has just said.

Thoughts?

If you read through the New Testament you will find that Jesus was focused almost entirely upon the Jews (Israel) and not interested (with some small exceptions) at all with speaking to Gentiles. Jesus was a Jew under the Law talking almost entirely to Jews under the Law and commanded the 12 apostles of his to only go to Jews (again under the Law). It wasn't till after the cross that we have any purposeful inclusion of Gentiles as an audience and that happened with a lot of reluctance of Peter and Jesus drafted Paul to send to the Gentiles. Even at the council of Jerusalem we see Paul and the rest of the Apostles still divided with the Apostles almost exclusively concerned with Jews and Paul concerned with Jews first then Gentiles.

Unless you throw out the idea that Gentiles were outsiders prior to the cross you have to read the New Testament with Jew-colored-glasses till after the cross which I see too often people reading it with Gentile-colored-glasses thinking everything applies to them which just isn't true by default. A lot does apply to Gentiles but that has to agree with those writers who later in the New Testament were addressing Gentiles and Jews BOTH together or Gentiles ONLY. We have often seen what was meant for Jews under the law pre-cross contradict Paul's writings and this is because the audience is ignored by those trying to bind what was meant for Jews pre-cross to Gentiles post-cross.

 

[LoveofTruth]

Because verse 19 seems to say the opposite of your point. Thanks for the reference.

Jesus hadnt died yet they were still under the Old Covenant and they had to do all God commanded. You miss it there

again read 2 Cor 3 about even when the Old testament is read the vail is on the heart

 

[Meowzltov]

again read 2 Cor 3 about even when the Old testament is read the vail is on the heart

2 Cor is written to Gentiles, who don't need to obey the law. Rather, take a look in Acts 15 where Jews, unlike the Gentiles, are left STILL circumcised and following the law.

 

[Athée]

Because verse 19 seems to say the opposite of your point. Thanks for the reference.

That is a really interesting take. Perhaps I didn't communicate clearly but it seems to me that verse 19 tells us two things. First that salvation is not linked to following the law. Those who both obey the law and teach others to do the same will be at the tip of the pile in heaven. Those who don't follow the laws or teach others not to will be the bottom of the pile in heaven. At the same time verse 19 shows us that the right way to live is to follow those commandments set out in the law and the prophets.
Could you maybe expand on your reading of the text to help me understand where you are coming from
Thanks

 

[Meowzltov]

Could you maybe expand on your reading of the text to help me understand where you are coming from

I think bottom of the pile is pretty self explanatory.

Let's look also at Matthew 19:16-17. It's where the man comes up to Jesus and asks what he must do to obtain eternal life. What does Jesus answer him? "if you want to receive eternal life, keep the commandments."

 

[Frogster]

Really? And you know Corinth had far above the normal level of Jews HOW?

Josephus says there was a Jewish population there.

Want text?

There were no synagogues in Philippi, that is why in Acts 16, they met by the river. Why? So few Jews, they had to actually have a certain number to have a synagogue.

Ok, now what do we see in Corinth?? Suprise, a synagogue, because there were plenty of Jewish people there!



Acts 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and tried to persuade Jews and Greeks.

 

[Frogster]

I can't help it. When you talk kitty talk, I just have to forgive you.

then you owe me a froggy talk! lol...

 

[Frogster]

I've always said that there were a negligable amount of Jews there. You are the one who thinks the number of Jews was significant. So now I'm calling you on the numbers. Go ahead. I await with baited breath.

Please stop acting like Paul did not address Jews in Romans. For Paul to address them, and in light of the fighting in Rom 14, about foods, and days, there had to be plenty or paul would not have bothered, nor would there be much fighting...

swooshhhhhhhhh...score frogster score!

 

[Athée]

I think bottom of the pile is pretty self explanatory.

Let's look also at Matthew 19:16-17. It's where the man comes up to Jesus and asks what he must do to obtain eternal life. What does Jesus answer him? "if you want to receive eternal life, keep the commandments."

So either you are mistaking my position or I have misunderstood you. I think the verses are saying that Christians should obey the law and commandments. That seems to be what you are saying as well?
Are you perhaps interpreting my "bottom of the pile" to mean they end up in hell? If so what I meant to convey was that not following the commands of the Law would still land them in heaven if they were also saved by grace through faith in Jesus. Just that they would be the lowest in heaven because they had not obeyed the law.

 

[Meowzltov]

Josephus says there was a Jewish population there.

No one doubts there were Jews there. You were saying there was a much higher percentage of Jews there than in the Empire at large. I don't think Josephus said that.

 

[Meowzltov]

then you owe me a froggy talk! lol...

Oh come now. RRRrribbit. You can't expect RRRrrribit that sort of thing from RRRrrribbit me!

 

[Meowzltov]

swooshhhhhhhhh...score frogster score!

tilting windmills again, sir quixote?

 

[Meowzltov]

So either you are mistaking my position or I have misunderstood you. I think the verses are saying that Christians should obey the law and commandments. That seems to be what you are saying as well?

OHHHHH so we agree. We just criss cross apple sauced.

 

[Frogster]

2 Cor is written to Gentiles, who don't need to obey the law. Rather, take a look in Acts 15 where Jews, unlike the Gentiles, are left STILL circumcised and following the law.

There were Jews and in the church of Corinth..

1 Cor 12:13 For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.

There were enough to go to the procounsul and cause trouble.

A UNITED attack..that does not mean 2 Jewish men.



Acts 18:12 But when Gallio was proconsul of Achaia, the Jews made a united attack on Paul and brought him before the tribunal,

 

[Frogster]

No one doubts there were Jews there. You were saying there was a much higher percentage of Jews there than in the Empire at large. I don't think Josephus said that.

oh come on, no one said they were the majority, but there were plenty of Jews in the church, let this one go already...meoooow!

who were the circumcised? There must have been plenty or why address circumcision? hehehehe

1 COR 7:18 Was anyone at the time of his call already circumcised? Let him not seek to remove the marks of circumcision. Was anyone at the time of his call uncircumcised? Let him not seek circumcision.