It's Sad That So Many Christians Consider Themselves "New Testament" Christians

[expos4ever]

Here is some thought-provoking stuff from prominent theologian NT Wright on Jesus' view of the Law (https://www.sbl-site.org/assets/pdfs/TBv4i1_WrightMosaicLaw.pdf):

Like many Jews of his day, Jesus saw the Mosaic Law not simply as a list of commands to be obeyed, but as a program and prophecy to be worked out and fulfilled. He saw the Exodus (the central drama of the Mosaic Law) as a foretaste of the upcoming ‘new exodus’ through which not only Israel but the whole world would be liberated from slavery, not just political but personal.

Jesus put eschatology rather than ethics at the center of his program: “the time is fulfilled,” he said (Mark 1:15). This meant that several existing aspects of the Law, like the food and purity regulations, were declared redundant (Mark 7)—not because they were stupid or irrational, but because they were part of the first main stage of God’s saving plan, and Jesus believed he was launching the final stage, the time of fulfillment.

If Wright is correct, and I believe that He is, the "retiring" of the Law of Moses makes perfect sense - the Law was not timeless but rather a participant in an evolving plan of redemption.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Yes, the clean/unclean laws of Leviticus 11 are still 100% in effect. God gave them those laws to keep them healthy....and He wants you and me to be healthy today,...so the laws are for our own good. I've lived by them for 60+ years.

And when you say clothing, I'm assuming you are talking about the laws that speak of not mixing various materials? I try hard to follow that, too.... Even if there are things I don't understand about these laws, I know God knows best, so I just follow them. They are not a burden for me...I see them as PROTECTORS.

Leviticus 3:17 mandated, "It shall be a perpetual statute for your generations throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat neither fat nor blood."

Of course no bacon or lean rare meat.

“Make tassels on the four corners of the cloak you wear.” Another law is even more specific: “You are to make tassels on the corners of your garments, with a blue cord on each tassel” (Numbers 15:38)

Do you ear tassels?

 

[pescador]

Leviticus 3:17 mandated, "It shall be a perpetual statute for your generations throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat neither fat nor blood."

Of course no bacon or lean rare meat.

“Make tassels on the four corners of the cloak you wear.” Another law is even more specific: “You are to make tassels on the corners of your garments, with a blue cord on each tassel” (Numbers 15:38)

Do you ear tassels?

If you follow the OT law, including Leviticus 3:17, then you must follow all of it. Since nobody except Christ has kept the OT law in its entirety, you are guilty and must pay the penalty: death.

There is no prohibition against eating bacon or lean rare meat or any other food in the New Covenant. And nobody is required to wear tassels on the corners of their garments under the New Covenant either.

 

[The Narrow Way]

Leviticus 3:17 mandated, "It shall be a perpetual statute for your generations throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat neither fat nor blood."

Of course no bacon or lean rare meat.

“Make tassels on the four corners of the cloak you wear.” Another law is even more specific: “You are to make tassels on the corners of your garments, with a blue cord on each tassel” (Numbers 15:38)

Do you ear tassels?

I have this little booklet called the Ribbon of Blue...it is based on that passage....calling us to separate from the world in how we dress. No, I do not wear a tassel but I do dress very different than the world.

And of course no fat or blood should EVER be eaten.

 

[The Narrow Way]

Oh goodness! Well, there goes the pork tenderloin cuisine that my wife was marinating and lovingly preparing for me and the rest of our family ... for tonight's dinner.

So, if I understand what you're saying correctly, if we eat our pork tenderloin dish tonight, it means we're going to Hell?

If we are convicted on ANYTHING, and we choose not to walk in the light....we go into darkness. God doesn't give up on us....but when we don't obey Him, we are turning our backs on Him and giving up on Him...He said, "If ye love Me, keep my commandments." Obedience is our evidence of our love for Him...

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

I have this little booklet called the Ribbon of Blue...it is based on that passage....calling us to separate from the world in how we dress. No, I do not wear a tassel but I do dress very different than the world.

And of course no fat or blood should EVER be eaten.

What about Acts 10?
9 About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. 13 Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

14 “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

16 This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.

Read full chapter

 

[2PhiloVoid]

If we are convicted on ANYTHING, and we choose not to walk in the light....we go into darkness. God doesn't give up on us....but when we don't obey Him, we are turning our backs on Him and giving up on Him...He said, "If ye love Me, keep my commandments." Obedience is our evidence of our love for Him...

Yes, in a certain way as a fellow Christian I agree with what you're saying. However, like a few others Christians here on this thread, I have a different understanding of the Law and the Prophets and how they are to be applied by us.

If I'm still understanding you in the right way, you're belief is that we need to recognize that at least some portions of the Law are still in effect for Christians, correct?

If this is the case, I think I'd see something clearly presented and stated about this by the N.T. authors. Could you cite a few places in the New Testament which you believe support your view on how we are to read and apply certain aspects of the Law? If you could do this, I'd appreciate it. Thanks!

 

[The Narrow Way]

Yes, in a certain way as a fellow Christian I agree with what you're saying. However, like a few others Christians here on this thread, I have a different understanding of the Law and the Prophets and how they are to be applied by us.

If I'm still understanding you in the right way, you're belief is that we need to recognize that at least some portions of the Law are still in effect for Christians, correct?

If this is the case, I think I'd see something clearly presented and stated about this by the N.T. authors. Could you cite a few places in the New Testament which you believe support your view on how we are to read and apply certain aspects of the Law? If you could do this, I'd appreciate it. Thanks!

Thank you for your kind and patient post .

I won't have time to get back to this today, but soon as I can, I'll be back! Have a good day!

 

[expos4ever]

Here is the problem as I see it. While there are indeed texts that suggest that both Jesus and Paul believed the status of the Law had not changed (i.e., it is still in force), these statements can be reconciled with the view that the Law is now retired by remembering that Scripture is not a set of timeless truths, it is an evolving narrative. And by other considerations.

So, for example, and with the respect to the "evolving narrative" argument, Jesus can tell people to obey the Law, knowing full well that the time of the applicability of the Law will be coming to an end on the cross.

I have already presented a fairly detailed argument as to why the statement "the Law will not pass away until heaven and earth pass away" can, in light of clear Biblical precedent, be interpreted to mean that the Law is coming to an end at the cross.

As for Paul saying (Romans 3:31), that he "sustains" the Law, this can, in light of other clear statements he makes about the Law being retired, be interpreted as a declaration about the fundamental goodness of the Law even though its time has come and gone.

 

[expos4ever]

Back to Romans 7:

But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code. What shall we say, then? Is the law sinful? Certainly not!

If you showed this statement to 100 people with no knowledge at all about Christianity, and no agendas to support, they would agree it is a clear statement that the time of the Law is over - that is simply how the English reads here: (a) the law is "old way" that is not how we are to "serve"; (b) we have been released from the Law; (c) we now serve in a new way that is not the Law.

So what do those who hold the Law is still in force do? They come up with this extremely contrived argument that the only thing that has changed with respect to the Law is that we are no longer under condemnation from it.

But this is not what Paul says - he writes that we no longer serve according to the Law! And if that were not clear enough, he tells us that there is a new guide for us - the Spirit.

This "we are no longer under the condemnation of the Law but are otherwise still obliged to follow it" is exceedingly forced.

 

[ViaCrucis]

What LAW do you think he's referring to? The 10 Commandments? You think it's OK to MURDER, STEAL, LIE now?

What part of murdering, stealing, and lying do you believe is justifiable under the Commandment to love our neighbor?

If we are abiding in the Commandment of Christ we fulfill the entirety of the Law, as St. Paul says in Galatians 5:14.

The 10 Commandments have always been received in the Church as a basic summation of God's moral commands; but it is far from some sort of list of rules for us. For example, the Third Commandment, "Sanctify the Sabbath Day" (or Fourth Commandment under John Calvin's numbering system used by most Protestants), while in its gross external sense is not applicable to us (the Sabbath, as Paul writes in Colossians 2, was one of the shadows that pointed to Christ who is the Substance). So how does the Christian "sanctify the Sabbath Day"? When there is no literal Sabbath Day to sanctify? I believe Dr. Luther in his Large Catechism presents the simplest and most convincing answer:

"This commandment, therefore, according to its gross sense, does not concern us Christians; for it is altogether an external matter, like other ordinances of the Old Testament, which were attached to particular customs, persons, times, and places, and now have been made free through Christ.

But to grasp a Christian meaning for the simple as to what God requires in this commandment, note that we keep holy days not for the sake of intelligent and learned Christians (for they have no need of it [holy days]), but first of all for bodily causes and necessities, which nature teaches and requires; for the common people, man-servants and maid-servants, who have been attending to their work and trade the whole week, that for a day they may retire in order to rest and be refreshed." - Luther's Large Catechism, Part 1, The Third Commandment

That is, the essence of the commandment is not about the gross and external observance of a particular day; rather it is in setting aside rest for those who labor and toil. The Christian employer, therefore, is obligated to provide rest and recuperation to his/her employees, to provide not only just compensatory wages for the labor, but also to see to that one's employees have time for rest, to be with their families, and are able to gather for worship. Depriving one's employee or servant of such things is to sin against God and neighbor.

Thus the Christian fulfills the Third Commandment through love of neighbor, not by seeking to please God through false merit through rote rule-keeping. The natural and carnal man adores lists, which is why the natural man thinks that if she or he can keep the gross external observance of these Ten then he or she thinks they are righteous--just look at the rich young ruler in Mark chapter 10.

God isn't impressed by simply calling Saturday special. And it doesn't mean a thing if you aren't loving other people, "If I speak all languages of men or even angels, but have not love, then I am nothing but a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal"

-CryptoLutheran

 

[pescador]

IMHO there is a simple explanation about the law vs the Spirit: the law is external, i.e., not a part of us; the Holy Spirit is internal, i.e. a real part of us.

 

[1watchman]

Paul says what matters and that is keeping the commandments of God. 1 Cor 7:19

Yes, and that verse quoted is referring to the New Testament in and about our Lord Jesus; not about the OT religion of Israel (except such sound prophecy by such as Isaiah and a few other faithful Prophets, who foretold of the Messiah and a new age coming; and were then rejected by the carnal Israelites who gained control and pressed for the killing of Him).
Today in this age of the 'dispensation of Christ', we need to go forward in faith in the Lord Jesus and following ALL the truths of the Epistles for the present universal Church. We do not deny the OT religion for Israel, but see the new dispensation for the Church today. All Israelites must come to the Savior today or will perish at the Judgment time!

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Yes, and that verse quoted is referring to the New Testament in and about our Lord Jesus; not about the OT religion of Israel (except such sound prophecy by such as Isaiah and a few other faithful Prophets, who foretold of the Messiah and a new age coming; and were then rejected by the carnal Israelites who gained control and pressed for the killing of Him).
Today in this age of the 'dispensation of Christ', we need to go forward in faith in the Lord Jesus and following ALL the truths of the Epistles for the present universal Church. We do not deny the OT religion for Israel, but see the new dispensation for the Church today. All Israelites must come to the Savior today or will perish at the Judgment time!

Circumcision is from the Old Testament so your argument is flawed.

Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing but what matters is keeping the commandments of God. God wrote His laws in our hearts and minds in the New Covenant. Hebrews 8:10. Jeremiah 31:33 which of course would include all Ten of the Commandments that God personally wrote with His own finger, kept in the ark of the covenant in the Most Holy of God's Temple, which is also revealed in heaven. Revelation 11:19

Right in the Ten Commandments God tells us He shows mercy to thousands who love Me and keeps My commandments. Exodus 20:6 Which Jesus quotes verbatim If you love Me, keep My commandments John 14:15 and Paul tells us what matters is keeping God's commandments 1 Cor 7:19 and John tells us love IS keeping the commandments of God. 1 John 5:3 and those who say they know God and do not keep His commandments, there is no truth in them and Jesus does not know them. 1 John 2:3-5 which is what Jesus warns as well Matthew 7:21-23 and that we should walk just as Jesus did who kept the commandments of God. John 15:10 and why James tells us if we break one of the Ten Commandments quoting directly from Exodus 20 James 2:10-12 we stand guilty before God of breaking all of them. Which is what Jesus warns as well. Matthew 5:19 Right before the second coming of Jesus we are told blessed are those who do His commandments that they may enter into the kingdom of Heaven. Revelation 22:14.


I think scripture disagrees with you here.

God bless.

 

[expos4ever]

God wrote His laws in our hearts and minds in the New Covenant. Hebrews 8:10. Jeremiah 31:33 which of course would include all Ten of the Commandments that God personally wrote with His own finger, kept in the ark of the covenant in the Most Holy of God's Temple, which is also revealed in heaven.

Here is the problem: if, repeat if, you are essentially saying that we take the Law and "internalize" it "as is", or memorize it, that would be a very difficult position to make sense of in light of what Paul (and Jesus) say.

To be more specific, to simply "memorize" the Law entails no fundamental change - it involves the mere mechanics of taking the Law and learning it by heart. Surely this cannot be what is meant by promises "to write the Law on our hearts". Surely the idea is that we would no longer need to actually refer to the Law to guide our actions - otherwise, the distinction between the Law on paper and the Law "on our hearts" is a mere technicality - a difference of form, and not of substance.

Again: Paul tells us that we no longer serve according to the Law, but according to the Spirit. He (Paul) characterizes the Law as "the old way" from which we have been released. Paul, at least, does not see the situations as one where we merely "internalize" the set of prescriptions embodied in the Law - he is thinking of a more profound change.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Here is the problem: if, repeat if, you are essentially saying that we take the Law and "internalize" it "as is", or memorize it, that would be a very difficult position to make sense of in light of what Paul (and Jesus) say.

To be more specific, to simply "memorize" the Law entails no fundamental change - it involves the mere mechanics of taking the Law and learning it by heart. Surely this cannot be what is meant by promises "to write the Law on our hearts". Surely the idea is that we would no longer need to actually refer to the Law to guide our actions - otherwise, the distinction between the Law on paper and the Law "on our hearts" is a mere technicality - a difference of form, and not of substance.

Again: Paul tells us that we no longer serve according to the Law, but according to the Spirit. He (Paul) characterizes the Law as "the old way" from which we have been released. Paul, at least, does not see the situations as one where we merely "internalize" the set of prescriptions embodied in the Law - he is thinking of a more profound change.

I think Jesus showed us the example of the law written on the heart when He said murder begins in the heart. It starts with our thoughts and feelings, so if we replace thoughts of anger and hate with love and compassion, the thought of murder won't enter our minds, so we will be keeping the commandment to "thou shalt not murder. Matthew 5:21-26. This is what the Spirit of the law is about. If one is keeping the Spirit of the law, the letter is automatically kept and it applies to all Ten of the commandments. Jesus said we should keep the least of the commandments and used two from the Ten as the example. Matthew 5:19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven

Sin is breaking the law of God. 1 John 3:4 and when we sin we are in danger of judgement "the condemnation of the law". James 2:10-12, Revelation 11:19, Matthew 5:21 Hebrews 10:26-30 When we are in the Spirit we are obeying and not sinning. Acts 5:32, Acts 2:38 and Jesus gives us the Holy Spirit so we can keep the commandments. John 14:15-18 The commandments are not meant to be burdensome. I mean really how hard is it to not steal, or murder, or bow to images, not worship other gods or break any of these commandments. What is not possible on our own IS possible through Christ.


1 John 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome.

 

[1watchman]

Circumcision is from the Old Testament so your argument is flawed.

Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing but what matters is keeping the commandments of God. God wrote His laws in our hearts and minds in the New Covenant. Hebrews 8:10. Jeremiah 31:33 which of course would include all Ten of the Commandments that God personally wrote with His own finger, kept in the ark of the covenant in the Most Holy of God's Temple, which is also revealed in heaven. Revelation 11:19

Right in the Ten Commandments God tells us He shows mercy to thousands who love Me and keeps My commandments. Exodus 20:6 Which Jesus quotes verbatim If you love Me, keep My commandments John 14:15 and Paul tells us what matters is keeping God's commandments 1 Cor 7:19 and John tells us love IS keeping the commandments of God. 1 John 5:3 and those who say they know God and do not keep His commandments, there is no truth in them and Jesus does not know them. 1 John 2:3-5 which is what Jesus warns as well Matthew 7:21-23 and that we should walk just as Jesus did who kept the commandments of God. John 15:10 and why James tells us if we break one of the Ten Commandments quoting directly from Exodus 20 James 2:10-12 we stand guilty before God of breaking all of them. Which is what Jesus warns as well. Matthew 5:19 Right before the second coming of Jesus we are told blessed are those who do His commandments that they may enter into the kingdom of Heaven. Revelation 22:14.


I think scripture disagrees with you here.

God bless.

Note the context of Rev. 22:14 and Rev. 11:19 which speaks of ALL "born again" saints, which many of us are by NT truth.

I would expect your reply from a SDA view, which so often misses NT turth; but may God bless you too. -1watchman

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I would expect that reply from a SDA view, which so often misses NT turth; but may God bless you too. -1watchman

I'm proud to be an SDA and I know there is just a "remnant left" who still keeps the commandments of God which is predicted in scriptures. Revelation 12:17.

Just a few decades ago the Ten Commandments was taught in public schools, now churches are teaching you can sin freely and teach against God's law. Sad state of affairs but has to happen as predicted before Jesus is to come again and restore what He initially intended before sin. God bless.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Peter considered the writings of Paul to be scripture.
2 Peter 3
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

 

[The Narrow Way]

Yes, in a certain way as a fellow Christian I agree with what you're saying. However, like a few others Christians here on this thread, I have a different understanding of the Law and the Prophets and how they are to be applied by us.


If I'm still understanding you in the right way, you're belief is that we need to recognize that at least some portions of the Law are still in effect for Christians, correct?


If this is the case, I think I'd see something clearly presented and stated about this by the N.T. authors. Could you cite a few places in the New Testament which you believe support your view on how we are to read and apply certain aspects of the Law? If you could do this, I'd appreciate it. Thanks!

I will try to support what I posted earlier.

First, as to Dietary Laws ~
@Akita Suggagaki asked in an earlier post about Acts 10. Many today are taught that the vision Peter was given 3 times, is teaching that Christians no longer need to abide by the dietary laws given in Leviticus 11, that they can eat whatever they want today. I believe that couldn't be any further from the truth.

If we look closely at that Acts 10 along with Acts 11, what this is clearly all about is teaching Peter that he needed to give up RACISM. The Jews were taught from the day they were born that Jews were far better than other races. Jesus worked hard for 3 years, before His death, to teach them that He loved those in other races just as much as He loved the Jews...but pre-conceived ideas are hard to give up. And even though Peter was a Christian, he hadn't yet come to love those not of the Jewish race as he needed to, in order to be a real worker for God and to be able to take the Gospel to "all Nations."

So, God sent Peter a vision where he compared UNCLEAN FOODS to NON-JEWS. God was about to send 3 messengers to Peter (that is why the vision was given 3 times), with a message asking him to come and preach the Gospel to them. Before this vision, Peter wouldn't have considered such a thing, as he looked at those from other nations as "unclean."

Peter INTERPRETS the dream for Cornelius ~

"And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean." Acts 10:28


As you can see here, the interpretation of the dream has NOTHING to do with food, and everything to do with RACISM. Peter was a RACIST. Had it not been for God sending him this dream, he would have refused to go with the 3 men to tell Cornelius and his house the Gospel.


When you read the rest of that chapter and the next, there isn’t one word that would lend support to the teaching that the dream was all about food, and telling Peter that it was now OK for Christians to eat unclean meats.