Galatians 3: Under The Law?

[Sophrosyne]

"from Sabbath to Sabbath shall ALL MANKIND come before Me to worship" - Is 66:23

Eph 6:2 -- 5th commandment is the "FIRST commandment with a promise" -- and is binding on all the saints. In what "unit of LAW" is the 5th commandment "the FIRST Commandment with a promise"?

proves nothing..... but worship 7 days a week and that some commandments are carried over to the new testament.... one is certainly 100% missing and that is the Sabbath commandment.

 

[Sophrosyne]

You missed the point of his non jurisdiction illustration.

bugkiller

They don't want to admit that the Old Testament limits the jurisdiction of the 10 commandments both in time and nationality... and the 10 were also valid through a theocracy (religious government) which has no examples of such in Christianity.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

"the law" for sake of argument here by those who are trying to bind us to it IS the Law of Moses which includes front and center the 10 commandments. I'm going to ignore laws that aren't instituted at sinai for sake of argument here just as I'm pretty much going to ignore any discussion that uses the Torah concept as such tactics are using the vague to bind us to the specific or using the unrelated to bind us to the related.

So you are confessing that you will disregard any law that God has instituted?

Can you explain to us why a God who is perfect and is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow, changes His mind so much about His laws? Does this ever changing God give you confidence in what He has said He will do...? I mean, if He can change His mind about something as important as laws, maybe He will change His mind about sending His Son again? How can you be sure?

 

[Sophrosyne]

So you are confessing that you will disregard any law that God has instituted?

Can you explain to us why a God who is perfect and is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow, changes His mind so much about His laws? Does this ever changing God give you confidence in what He has said He will do...? I mean, if He can change His mind about something as important as laws, maybe He will change His mind about sending His Son again? How can you be sure?

I'm disregarding laws that have no jurisdiction over me. As for your argument that God never changes you just proved God does change because God wasn't a man and then he became one so that pretty much negates the idea that he can't change his laws also. God's nature is what doesn't change but the way he deals with mankind changes as his plan for mankind marches on.

 

[bugkiller]

So you are confessing that you will disregard any law that God has instituted?

Can you explain to us why a God who is perfect and is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow, changes His mind so much about His laws? Does this ever changing God give you confidence in what He has said He will do...? I mean, if He can change His mind about something as important as laws, maybe He will change His mind about sending His Son again? How can you be sure?

Perhaps you should ask His (God's) lying prophets. Besides that you should read what Malachi and Jeremiah said.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

I'm disregarding laws that have no jurisdiction over me. As for your argument that God never changes you just proved God does change because God wasn't a man and then he became one so that pretty much negates the idea that he can't change his laws also. God's nature is what doesn't change but the way he deals with mankind changes as his plan for mankind marches on.

Zactly

bugkiller

 

[Mb_C]

Where does the Greek get translated as fulfilled when you think it should be translated as something else? How does expanded come from the Greek? Your post seems to be gibberish.

Specifically, Matthew 5:17. The Greek word Jesus used for "fulfill" is also means "make complete". Now, I'm not saying "fulfill" is an incorrect translation, it is correct. It's just that in English, "fulfill" can have the implied meaning of "completing a deal and thus being free of obligation". However, in the context of Jesus saying "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets" and "whoever keeps and teaches them (the law and the prophets), he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven", Jesus did not mean "completing a deal and thus being free of obligation", but "make complete".

If I was obligated to the 10 Cs, I might be more interested in your post.

Why do you guys make keeping the 10C about obligation? Let's get down to the basics. Do you believe you have or ever had sin? (It's not some trick question, it's a leading question).

You missed the point of his non jurisdiction illustration.

No, I didn't. I understood that he was referring to the 10C as the "law of the land" for Israel and not for the Gentiles thus not applying to Gentiles. The problem with that analogy is that God doesn't see it that way. Micah 4:2 prophesied that people outside of Israel will go to "the mountain of the Lord" (historically Mount Horeb, but symbolically the throne of God) to learn the law of God because they want to.

 

[Mb_C]

Hebrews chapter 7
11. If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the law was given to the people), why was there still need for another priest to come--one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?
12. For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law.


18. The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless

19. (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.

Change does not mean getting rid of. It means tweaking. I know you think the change in verse 12 means "swapped/replaced", but it's not the Greek word used.

 

[Mb_C]

And your point is? I see no commandment for nations to come, nor do I see a punishment for them to not come in this scripture.

The prophecy is about what happens after Micah's time period. It's a statement of what will happen. It's rather sad that God would need to say a threat to get you to do something that is good.

Is there some reason why you think keeping the Sabbath holy is not something God would like you to do? Does God need to threaten you with punishment to get you to help old people cross the road? Sure, it was only to Israel that God specifically said they had to keep or they'd have consequences. But, did you ever think of why God did it to them?

Are you also not aware that the Sabbath still belonged to God before and after Sinai?

Here's an analogy: Let's say you live in a land in which the only law governing your family is only your rules and they can't apply to other people. You tell your kids NOT to throw paint at your car. Does it mean it's ok to you if your neighbours' kids throw paint at your car? Sure, you can punish your kids since your rules apply to them, but what about your neighbours' kids? After that, you hold a party that's invitation-only. Those neighbours' kids want to come, but they still want to throw paint at your car because your house rules don't apply to them. Tell me, what would be your opinion of these kids? You can't tell them to stop either, since they're not your family.

This is deceptively inaccurate in that you aren't continuing on the thought of "sin's grasp" as you equate it. Paul says the LAW brought knowledge of sin, in order to bring us to realize we need Jesus as our savior. Paul also said after we are saved we no longer need the law to teach us about sin which you ignore his words upon that premise.

Ah, but weren't you just saying that the 10C can't apply to us since we're Gentiles? If it can't apply to us, then it can't benefit us by telling us what sin is.

Paul also says that Gentiles who have not the Law are in a sense not sinning because they are a "law unto themselves" or simply put they aren't sinning without the Law as their guide in the first place.

Well this is completely out of context of what he wrote. He wrote "For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves".

He wasn't saying that they don't keep the law, he was saying they instinctively do what the law says.

WRONG, absolutely there is no use to force circumcision upon anyone to be less sinful it means nothing to those who are not part of Israel the only reason to circumcise people is to bind them to Israel's laws or the Law of Moses.

Huh? I was only listing the origins of all the laws they brought up at that council. The meat juice ban was Noah's time, circumcision wasn't Moses' time, but Abraham's time.

The Royal Law is NOT the Mosaic Law there is no reason for this logic as James could have easily called it the Law of Moses as James himself equates we are NOT supposed to "part out" the Law of Moses it is all or nothing.

Hm... quick question: What do you think the royal law is?

God used the Law to judge those who were under its domain, he never judged the nations around Israel using the Law when he declared Israel should attack them because their inequity had risen to much for too long (they were sinning too much).
The problem with your logic is that only Israel was judged by the Law and NO others..... NONE. One had to become part of Israel to be under the Law and that required circumcision for that to be finalized.

Was God right in punishing the other nations for their iniquity?

 

[Mb_C]

proves nothing..... but worship 7 days a week and that some commandments are carried over to the new testament.... one is certainly 100% missing and that is the Sabbath commandment.

Firstly, I hope you understand that the Sabbath's sanctity did not come as a result of the 4th Commandment, but with Creation.

Secondly, this proves you are not a disciple of Jesus. This isn't an attack on your character or the like, I'm stating objective fact based on the definition of "disciple". A disciple did, said and believed the same things in the exact same manner of their teacher. It's how Jesus' disciples were recognised. The purpose of discipleship was akin to making carbon copies of the rabbi. Since Jesus kept the Sabbath holy, and you don't then you literally can't call yourself a disciple.

 

[Mb_C]

proves nothing..... but worship 7 days a week and that some commandments are carried over to the new testament.... one is certainly 100% missing and that is the Sabbath commandment.

By the way, Jesus said He is Lord of the Sabbath. If you have Jesus as your Lord, then you submit to His rule, don't you? When Jesus said He is Lord of the Sabbath, that meant that Jesus owns the Sabbath. You may say: "But there's no order for me to treat it holy, nor any punishment waiting for me if I don't."
...
I don't know any earthly ruler who likes it if you intentionally deface their property and expect to be in their good graces. If you want to have Jesus as your Lord, then you should be wanting to treat His property the way it should be treated. I mean, be real. Here's a scenario: If someone wanted to apply for permanent residence in the USA, making it a habit to throw eggs at the White House is a sure-fire way of Immigration rejecting you.

How can you think Jesus' thoughts are: "Only my children are forbidden to throw eggs at my Pagani. But since you're not my children, you're free to throw eggs at my Pagani."

 

[Bob S]

By the way, Jesus said He is Lord of the Sabbath. If you have Jesus as your Lord, then you submit to His rule, don't you? When Jesus said He is Lord of the Sabbath, that meant that Jesus owns the Sabbath. You may say: "But there's no order for me to treat it holy, nor any punishment waiting for me if I don't."
...
I don't know any earthly ruler who likes it if you intentionally deface their property and expect to be in their good graces. If you want to have Jesus as your Lord, then you should be wanting to treat His property the way it should be treated. I mean, be real. Here's a scenario: If someone wanted to apply for permanent residence in the USA, making it a habit to throw eggs at the White House is a sure-fire way of Immigration rejecting you.

How can you think Jesus' thoughts are: "Only my children are forbidden to throw eggs at my Pagani. But since you're not my children, you're free to throw eggs at my Pagani."

Hi Mb, Question, do you believe in the writings of the Apostle Paul and John the disciple? If you have a problem with either then I certainly cannot debate what you wrote. The rules changed with the Ruler. Jesus was under the ruler-ship of Moses, Christians are under the ruler-ship of Jesus.

Jesus was much more than the Lord of the Sabbath. He is Lord of everyday. He was Lord of the Feast days, New moons, in fact all the commands given to Israel called the Torah. When Jesus died on the Cross Torah law came to an end. It is now history. Jesus death ushered in the New Covenant. All old was finished. He kept Torah, something that was never done before and gave the whole World the covenant of Grace through faith. Read clear through 1Jn 3 and find out what commands are Christians duty. John will unlock the plan for you. Until you understand those simple commands starting at verse 19 you will continue to be under the laws given only to the Israelites and not under the Grace of Jesus. I pray this helps.

 

[Mb_C]

Hi Mb, Question, do you believe in the writings of the Apostle Paul and John the disciple?

I do.

The rules changed with the Ruler. Jesus was under the ruler-ship of Moses, Christians are under the ruler-ship of Jesus.

That's a bit misleading don't you think, considering Jesus is the one who gave Moses those instructions in the first place?

Jesus was much more than the Lord of the Sabbath. He is Lord of everyday. He was Lord of the Feast days, New moons, in fact all the commands given to Israel called the Torah.

But obviously, that's not the point Jesus was making, otherwise He would have said that He is "Lord of everything". Jesus was reminding the Pharisees and scribes of who had the right to say what to do or not do on the Sabbath.

Also, all the other special days were given after sin, whereas Sabbath predates sin.

When Jesus died on the Cross Torah law came to an end. It is now history.

Well, the royal law is part of the Torah, so... you believe we're not to keep the royal law?

Jesus death ushered in the New Covenant. All old was finished. He kept Torah, something that was never done before and gave the whole World the covenant of Grace through faith. Read clear through 1Jn 3 and find out what commands are Christians duty. John will unlock the plan for you. Until you understand those simple commands starting at verse 19 you will continue to be under the laws given only to the Israelites and not under the Grace of Jesus.

Firstly, this clearly means you believe we are to keep the royal law.

Secondly, since you believe we are to keep the royal law, and the Sabbath is God's property, if we love Him, we should not be thinking of defiling His property.

Thirdly, no one can keep the law of God without the grace of Jesus.
Without the grace of Jesus, we would be under the law and as a result we cannot be subject to the law of God (the Greek words for 'under' and 'subject' are different, in case you're confused by this). Not being subject to the law of God is what causes us to be at enmity with God in the first place. With the grace of Jesus, the mind is no longer carnal and thus now subject to the law of God. (Romans 8:6-8)

 

[Bob S]

Firstly, I hope you understand that the Sabbath's sanctity did not come as a result of the 4th Commandment, but with Creation.

you are free to write that, but you certainly cannot prove it by scripture or history. But for argument sake lets assume you are correct, how does that change the fact that the Sabbath is not relevant today? The New Testament does not teach or command the observance of the Sabbath or for that matter any day. Gentiles have never been subject to the law of Sabbath observance. Jesus commands us to love others as He loves us. He never ever tried to teach Sabbath observance yet because He was born under the law He Himself was an observer.

Secondly, this proves you are not a disciple of Jesus. This isn't an attack on your character or the like, I'm stating objective fact based on the definition of "disciple". A disciple did, said and believed the same things in the exact same manner of their teacher. It's how Jesus' disciples were recognised. The purpose of discipleship was akin to making carbon copies of the rabbi. Since Jesus kept the Sabbath holy, and you don't then you literally can't call yourself a disciple.

Judge not my friend. Where do you find the regulations to become a disciple of Jesus? Jesus kept all the Torah, do you? Are you really keeping Sabbath or are you giving lip service to it? Do you really observe the feast days, and all the laws that pertained to the common person. Do you pay your tithe in animals or crops like it was demanded.The law demanded that the Israelite pay the tithe to the priesthood, the Levites. Is that possible today? Read through the law and see if you are really following all that Jesus believed and did. I think you will find that the only thing you are doing is giving lip service to what you say you do. After you really do what you are telling others thy should do then maybe we will be more attentive to what you write.

 

[Mb_C]

you are free to write that, but you certainly cannot prove it by scripture or history.

This is actually an established historical fact about what the term "disciple" meant. It's not something from the Bible because this was a cultural concept of the Jews. Go look up the significance of "Come follow me" in Hebrew. It's a lot more than just believing a rabbi's school of thought.

But for argument sake lets assume you are correct, how does that change the fact that the Sabbath is not relevant today? The New Testament does not teach or command the observance of the Sabbath or for that matter any day. Gentiles have never been subject to the law of Sabbath observance. Jesus commands us to love others as He loves us.

The New Testament doesn't teach to help the elderly cross the road either, but we are to do it out of love. Application of love, that's why. Furthermore, how can it not be out of love? The Sabbath was meant to be a blessing, but you make it out to be a burden. It's only a burden if you see it like the Pharisees - a day of not doing some things. Whereas if you see it like Jesus did - a day to do good and enjoy good, then it becomes a refreshing day.

He never ever tried to teach Sabbath observance yet because He was born under the law He Himself was an observer.

He taught proper Sabbath observance to the Pharisees - He let them know it was lawful to do good on the Sabbath and relieve suffering.

Judge not my friend. Where do you find the regulations to become a disciple of Jesus?

It's the historical definition of the word.

Jesus kept all the Torah, do you? Are you really keeping Sabbath or are you giving lip service to it?

That depends on how you define it. I don't observe the sacrificial system because Hebrews clearly states Jesus became High Priest and sacrifice. I don't observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread per se, but I observe the Communion which is what the Passover was about... I'm not going to list all here, but if you so desire to go through each one here, then ok. But, a few of the laws definitely can't be kept now that Jesus is High Priest in heaven, like men's [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] laws and women's menses laws, since there's only the heavenly temple now. If you can find a modern day application, let me know. There are laws about slaves (indentured servants, not the same as Roman, English and American slaves) that I don't follow because I have no slaves. I'm vegetarian, but I believe in the clean/unclean laws being given for good reason.

You got a checklist? Btw, Jesus did not keep the agricultural laws because they did not apply to carpentry. The laws were about context as well. "If you have crops", "If you have slaves", "If you have sex", "If you have children", etc.

Do you pay your tithe in animals or crops like it was demanded.

Actually, it was already established post-Moses' time among the Israelites that tithe in money was ok. The point was tithing your financial gains.

The law demanded that the Israelite pay the tithe to the priesthood, the Levites. Is that possible today?

Hebrews says our High Priest is Jesus, so we tithe to the storehouse of His work (which was the purpose of the tithe - to support the ministry of the priests), so it becomes the ministers' salaries.

 

[Sophrosyne]

The prophecy is about what happens after Micah's time period. It's a statement of what will happen. It's rather sad that God would need to say a threat to get you to do something that is good.

Is there some reason why you think keeping the Sabbath holy is not something God would like you to do? Does God need to threaten you with punishment to get you to help old people cross the road? Sure, it was only to Israel that God specifically said they had to keep or they'd have consequences. But, did you ever think of why God did it to them?

Are you also not aware that the Sabbath still belonged to God before and after Sinai?

I've looked throughout the Bible and I've not seen any instruction for me... a Gentile Christian to keep the Sabbath Day.

Here's an analogy: Let's say you live in a land in which the only law governing your family is only your rules and they can't apply to other people. You tell your kids NOT to throw paint at your car. Does it mean it's ok to you if your neighbours' kids throw paint at your car? Sure, you can punish your kids since your rules apply to them, but what about your neighbours' kids? After that, you hold a party that's invitation-only. Those neighbours' kids want to come, but they still want to throw paint at your car because your house rules don't apply to them. Tell me, what would be your opinion of these kids? You can't tell them to stop either, since they're not your family.

Irrelevant example as Christians don't advocate such things it isn't loving your neighbor to damage other people's property.

Ah, but weren't you just saying that the 10C can't apply to us since we're Gentiles? If it can't apply to us, then it can't benefit us by telling us what sin is.

They don't apply to us, there is plenty of examples in the New Testament to tell us what sin is WITHOUT bringing up the 10 commandments, in fact 9 of the 10 ARE listed in an example given by Jesus himself ironically the Sabbath was NOT mentioned at all.

Well this is completely out of context of what he wrote. He wrote "For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves".

He wasn't saying that they don't keep the law, he was saying they instinctively do what the law says.

If they don't have the Law then how can they know how to do complicated things of the Law. It isn't the "exact" same thing but rather they aren't just going around hurting each other. The Sabbath commandment isn't one that you can just "do" without knowing what not to do.

Huh? I was only listing the origins of all the laws they brought up at that council. The meat juice ban was Noah's time, circumcision wasn't Moses' time, but Abraham's time.


Hm... quick question: What do you think the royal law is?


Was God right in punishing the other nations for their iniquity?

The royal law is love your neighbor and love God, Did God ever mention punishing other nations for NOT keeping a Sabbath Holy? NO.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Firstly, I hope you understand that the Sabbath's sanctity did not come as a result of the 4th Commandment, but with Creation.

Secondly, this proves you are not a disciple of Jesus. This isn't an attack on your character or the like, I'm stating objective fact based on the definition of "disciple". A disciple did, said and believed the same things in the exact same manner of their teacher. It's how Jesus' disciples were recognised. The purpose of discipleship was akin to making carbon copies of the rabbi. Since Jesus kept the Sabbath holy, and you don't then you literally can't call yourself a disciple.

Absolute Rubbish...... The Sabbath DAY was not instituted at Creation otherwise it would NOT have been "given" to Israel but rather they would have already been keeping it and they were clueless as to it until it was revealed to Moses et all. Christians aren't supposed to become Jewish and follow the Law and go to synagog. Jesus never called for Gentiles to convert to Judaism nor did anyone of importance advocate such in the New Testament in fact Paul fought those who were trying to judaize others and the edict of the council of Jerusalem shows that.
You can't call yourself a disciple of Jesus using your own standard either as you fall far short of keeping the Law as he did.

 

[Sophrosyne]

By the way, Jesus said He is Lord of the Sabbath. If you have Jesus as your Lord, then you submit to His rule, don't you? When Jesus said He is Lord of the Sabbath, that meant that Jesus owns the Sabbath. You may say: "But there's no order for me to treat it holy, nor any punishment waiting for me if I don't."
...
I don't know any earthly ruler who likes it if you intentionally deface their property and expect to be in their good graces. If you want to have Jesus as your Lord, then you should be wanting to treat His property the way it should be treated. I mean, be real. Here's a scenario: If someone wanted to apply for permanent residence in the USA, making it a habit to throw eggs at the White House is a sure-fire way of Immigration rejecting you.

How can you think Jesus' thoughts are: "Only my children are forbidden to throw eggs at my Pagani. But since you're not my children, you're free to throw eggs at my Pagani."

Wrong...a LORD doesn't have to always submit to Laws of his people he is above those laws and in him (in Christ) I don't have to worry about a Law meant for those under dominion of that "Lord". Again your idiiotic arguments about defacing things to be equal to keeping the Sabbath are irrelevant to me keeping a day has no 1 to 1 connection to damaging property it is a very LOUSY example and truly shows desperation in the way you accuse Sabbath "breakers" of being vandals and that accusation is accusing MOST of Christianity of being vandals.... good luck with that idea.

 

[Cribstyl]

Firstly, I hope you understand that the Sabbath's sanctity did not come as a result of the 4th Commandment, but with Creation.

Secondly, this proves you are not a disciple of Jesus. This isn't an attack on your character or the like, I'm stating objective fact based on the definition of "disciple". A disciple did, said and believed the same things in the exact same manner of their teacher. It's how Jesus' disciples were recognised. The purpose of discipleship was akin to making carbon copies of the rabbi. Since Jesus kept the Sabbath holy, and you don't then you literally can't call yourself a disciple.

Respectfully, Mb C
All your socalled objective facts seem questionable at best. Explain these scriptures please?
Jhn 7:22 Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man.
Jhn 7:23 If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day?

It seem clear that Jesus explained that circumcision was passed down from the fathers as to why it was performed on the Sabbath. This coincide exactly with what the scriptures say and prove.
God explained that He gave the Children of Israel the Sabbath.
God made the Sabbath an exclusive covenant with one nation.

The fact that before leaving Egypt God told Moses what the COI, the foreigner and the stranger who join should keep ordinances going forward. Sabbath was not on the list. Circumcision was.

You have some nerve to judge someone I've know for years as not a disciple of Christ.

 

[Cribstyl]

By the way, Jesus said He is Lord of the Sabbath. If you have Jesus as your Lord, then you submit to His rule, don't you? When Jesus said He is Lord of the Sabbath, that meant that Jesus owns the Sabbath. You may say: "But there's no order for me to treat it holy, nor any punishment waiting for me if I don't."
...
I don't know any earthly ruler who likes it if you intentionally deface their property and expect to be in their good graces. If you want to have Jesus as your Lord, then you should be wanting to treat His property the way it should be treated. I mean, be real. Here's a scenario: If someone wanted to apply for permanent residence in the USA, making it a habit to throw eggs at the White House is a sure-fire way of Immigration rejecting you.

How can you think Jesus' thoughts are: "Only my children are forbidden to throw eggs at my Pagani. But since you're not my children, you're free to throw eggs at my Pagani."

If context matters, Jesus' claim of Lord of the Sabbath was explained: because, He and all priests, are exempt because they work on the Sabbath. Jesus always worked on the Sabbath.