What is the law of Christ?

brightlights

A sinner
Jul 31, 2004
4,164
298
USA
✟28,862.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Disagree. I know what love is, and don't need someone to define it for me. If someone needs "love" to be defined for them, then feel free to offer your "rules of love" but I doubt you're going to get many people needing you to explain love to them.

I have no idea what love is and am in desperate need of God to define it for me. I'm grateful that he has defined it for me through his law but principally through the giving of his son Jesus.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Soyeong
Upvote 0

John Hyperspace

UnKnown ReMember
Oct 3, 2016
2,385
1,272
53
Hyperspace
✟35,143.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I have no idea what love is

I'm sorry to hear that. Even more sorry for your spouse; I take it you've either never told them you loved them, or, were lying when you said it since you don't actually know what love is.
 
Upvote 0

brightlights

A sinner
Jul 31, 2004
4,164
298
USA
✟28,862.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I'm sorry to hear that. Even more sorry for your spouse; I take it you've either never told them you loved them, or, were lying when you said it since you don't actually know what love is.

It is truly tragic. I only know what it means to love myself. But when it comes to loving God and others I'm totally clueless. I fall short everyday of both understanding what love is and actually fulfilling my obligation to love. I'm a deeply flawed man in need of God's grace.
 
Upvote 0

dougangel

Regular
Site Supporter
May 7, 2012
1,423
238
New Zealand
✟85,556.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Disagree. I know what love is, and don't need someone to define it for me. If someone needs "love" to be defined for them, then feel free to offer your "rules of love" but I doubt you're going to get many people needing you to explain love to them.

Some people think love is always making your child happy and giving them no boundaries or rules.
A lot of people would say that isn't love.
which one do you think is the best ?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Soyeong
Upvote 0

dougangel

Regular
Site Supporter
May 7, 2012
1,423
238
New Zealand
✟85,556.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Jesus summarized the Mosaic Law as being about how to love God and how to love your neighbor (Matthew 22:36-40) and Paul said that love fulfills the entire Law (Galatians 5:14), so how is the Law of Christ being about love distinct from the Mosaic Law?



Likewise, God's Law is the same as the Law of the Spirit of life, which are both quite distinct from the law of sin and death (Romans 7:21-25). The law of sin and dead was what caused Paul to not do the good that he wanted to do in obedience to the Mosaic Law.
Mathew 5: The Fulfilment of the Law

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus is saying there are still laws and standards. Jesus is saying we are to teach and obey these commands. Right after this, he lists these commands. Here are some of his commands that he teaches straight after what he said.

A lot of the teachings of Christ are not the same as the teaching of Moses. For example:

Matthew 5: 21- with comments

§ Murder

21 “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, ‘Raca’ is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell. 23“Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift.

25“Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still with him on the way, or he may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison. 26 I tell you the truth, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny.

Jesus tells us also not to be angry. He puts a focus on our thought processes. This is a change of philosophy to OT Law.

§ Adultery

27“You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’ 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

Again Jesus is telling us not only not to do the act but also not to think about things of this nature. This is a new way of Thinking from Moses’s law

§ Divorce

31“It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

If you follow the Old Testament adultery laws, then you are in adultery In the New testament. A major change to the adultery law.

§ Oaths

33“Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.’ 34But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. 36And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. 37Simply let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.



Numbers 30:2 When a man makes a vow to the Lord or takes an oath to obligate himself by a pledge, he must not break his word but must do everything he said.


As you can see the Old Testament command or teaching is completely different to Christs. Christ changes this teaching in totally different way to the Old Testament. There are no longer oaths or swearing on something.

It’s a complete change. When we go into the Old Testament we must realise this, If we want to interpret it correctly.

§ An Eye for an Eye

38“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Deuteronomy 24:21 Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.

As you can see the Old Testament command or teaching is quite different to Christs. Christ approaches this teaching in totally different way to the Old Testament. This is a complete change of Philosophy from the Old Testament to the New Testament. There is no longer an eye for an eye and so on.

§ Love for Enemies

43“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbour and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Again a new law and a complete change to Levi Law.

More examples of changes in the law

§ The law distinguishes between clean and unclean foods. Lev.10 and 11; Deut.14.
Paul says that all foods are clean. 1 Tim.4: 1-4.
A "heavenly voice" told Peter the same thing. Acts 11: 6-9.
Jesus states that there is no such distinction. Mk.7:14,15


§ Sacrifices were to take away sin. Num.15:24-28.
"Jesus" sacrifice took away sins. Heb.10:12; Heb.9:26-28.


It becomes clear in these passages and in the NT that Jesus’s is re using the 10 commandments , but there were clarifications or additions and in some cases complete changes. And many changes in Leviticus law. Jesus approaches the law quite differently than Moses.

Christ did not simply do away with the law, ignore it, or destroy it, he satisfied it, completed it or fulfilled it. Jesus is the substance of the shadows, the completion of law, the greater promise.

John 15:10 New King James Version (NKJV)

10 If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love.

John 14:21
 
Upvote 0

John Hyperspace

UnKnown ReMember
Oct 3, 2016
2,385
1,272
53
Hyperspace
✟35,143.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Some people think love is always making your child happy and giving them no boundaries or rules.
A lot of people would say that isn't love.
which one do you think is the best ?

I would propose that as long as the child is loved, and loves in return, the "rules and boundaries" are insignificant: love will become "a law unto itself". The idea that love can't be known except through written rules is only applicable to those people who do not love others; they need written rules outside of them to govern their behaviour because they have no law of love written on their hearts. Scripture bears this out completely, especially in the case which is taught that the "Gentiles which have not the law, by nature fulfill the law in their hearts": Romans 2:14-15.

Now, clearly the Gentiles had neither the old or new covenant, they knew nothing of either Moses or Jesus Christ; but they still fulfilled the law "written in their hearts" which is meaning that Gentiles were and are capable of loving others. A non-Christian doesn't need the bible to tell them what rules define "love", love is a law unto itself, and it is written in the heart. The written rules "engraved in stone" are not for people with love in their heart, the written rules are for people with hatred in their heart; hearts empty of a "law unto itself" must have a written law forced upon them by penalty of wrath to make them behave as though they are loving people.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Original Happy Camper

One of GODS Children I am a historicist
Site Supporter
Mar 19, 2016
4,195
1,970
Alabama
✟486,806.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
John 13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

First 4 of the 10 commandments is how we Love God

The last 6 of the 10 is how we love one another.

"If you love me Keep my Commandments."
 
Upvote 0

John Hyperspace

UnKnown ReMember
Oct 3, 2016
2,385
1,272
53
Hyperspace
✟35,143.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
First 4 of the 10 commandments is how we Love God

The last 6 of the 10 is how we love one another.

How then do you propose that the Gentiles, which do not have 1-10 at all, were still fulfilling the work of the law "written in their hearts": Romans 2:14-15? No one with love in their heart needs the 10 commandments to define their actions; the Gentiles certainly didn't. Neither do we.

Or, why do you suppose the apostles wrote to the Gentiles: Acts 21:25, Acts 15:29? Why didn't the apostles list the ten commandments?

"If you love me Keep my Commandments."

Which is just a way of saying, "If you love Me, love others as I have loved you": John 13:34-35, John 15:12, John 15:17, Romans 13:8, 1 John 3:11, 1 John 4:7, 1 John 4:11-12, 2 John 1:5. It is simple.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Original Happy Camper

One of GODS Children I am a historicist
Site Supporter
Mar 19, 2016
4,195
1,970
Alabama
✟486,806.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
No one with love in their heart needs the 10 commandments to define their actions; the Gentiles certainly didn't. Neither do we.

So you are without sin?
1 John 3:4
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

Even for the Gentiles unless they were sinless
 
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,433
4,605
Hudson
✟284,522.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Mathew 5: The Fulfilment of the Law

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus is saying there are still laws and standards. Jesus is saying we are to teach and obey these commands. Right after this, he lists these commands. Here are some of his commands that he teaches straight after what he said.

Does it make sense to you that Jesus would say that not the least part would disappear from the Law until the end of time and give a warning to those who would relax the least law or teach other to do the same, then immediately proceed with doing away with parts of the Law a few verses later?

Whenever Jesus quoted from the Law, he always preceded it by saying "it is written", but when he was quoting from what the teachers of the Law had been teaching, then he preceded by saying "you have heard that it was said". Jesus was about to correct what the teachers of the Law were teaching, which would have sounded to them like he was abolishing or undermining the Law, so he preceded by saying that he came not to undermine to Law, but to fulfill, to add clarity, to fill the Law up with meaning, or to fully teach how to correctly understand and obey the Law, and then he proceeded to do that throughout the rest of Matthew 5.

A lot of the teachings of Christ are not the same as the teaching of Moses. For example:

According to Deuteronomy 4:2, it is a sin to add to or subtract from God's Law, so if Jesus had done what you are suggesting, then he would have sinner who could not even save himself from his own sin.

Matthew 5: 21- with comments

§ Murder

21 “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, ‘Raca’ is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell. 23“Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift.

25“Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still with him on the way, or he may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison. 26 I tell you the truth, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny.

Jesus tells us also not to be angry. He puts a focus on our thought processes. This is a change of philosophy to OT Law.

According to Leviticus 19:17, we are commanded not to hate our brother, so Jesus was teaching nothing new.

§ Adultery

27“You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’ 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

Again Jesus is telling us not only not to do the act but also not to think about things of this nature. This is a new way of Thinking from Moses’s law

This is just the correct application of the 7th and 10th Commandments, so nothing new.

§ Divorce

31“It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

If you follow the Old Testament adultery laws, then you are in adultery In the New testament. A major change to the adultery law.

According to Deuteronomy 24:1-4, it says that a woman who divorces and marries another defiles herself, so nothing new.

§ Oaths

33“Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.’ 34But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. 36And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. 37Simply let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.



Numbers 30:2 When a man makes a vow to the Lord or takes an oath to obligate himself by a pledge, he must not break his word but must do everything he said.


As you can see the Old Testament command or teaching is completely different to Christs. Christ changes this teaching in totally different way to the Old Testament. There are no longer oaths or swearing on something.

It’s a complete change. When we go into the Old Testament we must realise this, If we want to interpret it correctly.

Deuteronomy 6:13 Fear the Lord your God, serve him only and take your oaths in his name.

Deuteronomy 10:20 Fear the Lord your God and serve him. Hold fast to him and take your oaths in his name.

1 Kings 2:23 Then King Solomon swore by the Lord: “May God deal with me, be it ever so severely, if Adonijah does not pay with his life for this request!

1 Samuel 20:3 But David took an oath and said, “Your father knows very well that I have found favor in your eyes, and he has said to himself, ‘Jonathan must not know this or he will be grieved.’ Yet as surely as the Lord lives and as you live, there is only a step between me and death.”

Jeremiah 12:16 And if they learn well the ways of my people and swear by my name, saying, ‘As surely as the Lord lives’—even as they once taught my people to swear by Baal—then they will be established among my people.

We see that God gave explicit commands to swear in His name, we have examples of people doing that throughout the Bible, and in Jeremiah 12:16, Gentiles are specifically instructed to swear by God's name. However, Jesus was not contradicting this, but rather he was coming against the practice of false swearing, which was nothing new (Leviticus 19:12, Deuteronomy 23:21). This is what the Matthew 5:33-34 says in the Hebrew:

(33) You have further heard what was said by the ancients, "you shall not swear falsely by my name" but you must pay your vow to YHWH. (34) But I say to you, that you must not swear by anything falsely, not by heaven which is the throne of God, (35) nor by the earth which is His footstool, nor by [Jerusalem] which is His city, (36) nor by your head because you cannot make one hair white or black, (37) But let your yes be yes and your no, no. Anything added to this is evil.

Jesus was saying that when we swear by anything that our yes had better be a true yes, and vice versa. The issue was that verses like Leviticus 19:12, which prohibited swearing falsely in God's name had been twisted to imply that if they were permitted to swear falsely when they didn't swear in God's name (Matthew 23:16-20). So yes, we are supposed to swear in God's name, but if we swear by other things, Jesus was saying that that doesn't mean that you're allowed to lie because the principle behind the commandment is not to swear falsely. When Jesus said this, he would have been accused of adding to the Law because it doesn't expressly prohibit swearing falsely in other contexts, which is why he made it clear that he was not adding to it, but bringing out its underlying principle, which is why he said that anything added to this is evil (Deuteronomy 4:2). In Matthew 23:20-22, Jesus said was making the point that anyone who swears is swearing by God, so he was upholding true vows and coming against false vows, which would contradict Matthew 5 if it was speaking against making any vows altogether. He wasn't speaking against making judicial oaths or oaths in solemn occasions because we have examples of him answering under oath before the Sanhedrin (Matthew 26:63-64) and of Paul making an oath (2 Corinthians 1:23) and other examples of Paul making a solemn appeal to God, but rather Jesus was speaking against swearing falsely.

§ An Eye for an Eye

38“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Deuteronomy 24:21 Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.

As you can see the Old Testament command or teaching is quite different to Christs. Christ approaches this teaching in totally different way to the Old Testament. This is a complete change of Philosophy from the Old Testament to the New Testament. There is no longer an eye for an eye and so on.

The reference for an eye to and eye is Exodus 21:24-25 and Deuteronomy 19:18-21 in regard to being a guideline for judges to give faith sentencing where the punishment matches the crime. However, it was not intended to be used as a guideline for personal revenge, as the religious leaders were doing contrary to the OT (Proverbs 20:22, Proverbs 24:29).

§ Love for Enemies

43“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbour and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Again a new law and a complete change to Levi Law.

More examples of changes in the law

God's Law does command us to love our neighbor, so that was nothing new, but it does not command us to hate our enemies, so that was what Jesus was correcting.

I'll get to the rest in a different post.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,433
4,605
Hudson
✟284,522.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
§ The law distinguishes between clean and unclean foods. Lev.10 and 11; Deut.14.
Paul says that all foods are clean. 1 Tim.4: 1-4.

There is a theme throughout the Bible that we must obey God rather than man, so it is important not to take something that was only against obeying the laws of men as being against obeying the Laws of God.

1 Timothy 4:3-5 who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5 for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer.

The Word of God only made clean animals holy and we should not receive with thanksgiving that which God said is an abomination for us, so this is saying that everything created by God is good and nothing is to be rejected if it is kosher. In the surrounding context of verses 1-8, Paul was describing the teachers as departing from the faith, as devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and the teachings of demons, as having seared consciences, as forbidding marriage, as teaching irreverent and silly myths, and as being ungodly, so does it sound to you like he was describing someone who was teaching obedience to the holy, righteous, and good commands of our God or like someone who is promoting humans precepts and traditions, self-made religion, severity to the body, and asceticism (Colossians 2:20-23)? I think it makes much more sense to interpret those who "require abstinence from certain foods to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth" to be referring to those who were teaching severity to the body and asceticism. In other words, the teachers were trying to require abstinence from eating kosher food that God created to be recieved with thanksgiving. According to Psalms 119:142, God's Law is truth, so those who believe and know the truth know that we are permitted to eat kosher food.

A "heavenly voice" told Peter the same thing. Acts 11: 6-9.

It says in his vision that all kinds of animals were let down, so why didn't Peter simply obey the command to kill and eat by killing one of the clean animals? Why did he object to doing what the Torah permits? The issue is that there was a man-made ritual purity law that said that if something clean came in contact with something that we unclean, then it became ritually impure, defiled or common. All of the animals were bundled together in the sheet, so all of the clean animals there had become common, thus when Peter objected by saying that he had never eaten anything that was common or unclean, he was saying that he had never broken that man-made ritual purity law or God's dietary Law. So by refusing to obey the heavenly voice and eat a clean animal, Peter was disobeying God in order to obey man. Note that God did not rebuke him for referring to clean animals as unclean, but for referring to clean animals as common. Peter stated the interpretation of his vision three times as doing away with the laws of men (Acts 10:28) and not once did he say anything about doing away with God's dietary laws. If Peter had said that, then they would have rejected what he said in the same way that we would reject someone who said that they had a vision from God who told him that it was not ok to commit murder, adultery, theft, or to disobey any of God's other commands.

Jesus states that there is no such distinction. Mk.7:14,15

If you are correct, that Jesus stated this, then that would mean that he sinned in violation of Deuteronomy 4:2 and would have needed to repent. Furthermore, according to Deuteronomy 13:4-5, the way that God instructed the Israelites to tell that someone was a false prophet, even if they performed signs and wonders, such as rising from the dead, was if they taught them against obeying what He had commanded them, so if Jesus had said that, then he was a false prophet that we should disregard. His critics would have for once had a legitimate reason to stone him and they wouldn't have needed to find false witnesses at his trial, but this incident was never even brought up, nor does it appear that anyone even noticed that he made such a radical statement as doing away with the very commands of God. Furthermore, he had just finished criticizing the Pharisees as being hypocrites for setting aside the commands of God, so if he had done so, then he would have been an even bigger hypocrite.

The issue again is that we should not take something that was against the laws of men as being against obeying the Laws of God. The topic being discussed in Mark 7 is again this man-made ritual purity law that said you could become defiled by eating kosher food with unwashed hands (Mark 7:1-4). Jesus responded by saying that no doing that didn't make you become defiled, so he was not completely jumping topics and speaking about God's dietary laws. His statement in the parallel account in Matthew 15:20 confirms that at the end of the conversation he was still talking about not being defiled by eating with unwashed hands.

§ Sacrifices were to take away sin. Num.15:24-28.
"Jesus" sacrifice took away sins. Heb.10:12; Heb.9:26-28.

They could be reconciled to God for unintentional sins, but it never took away their sins because it never cleansed their conscience (Hebrews 9:9)

It becomes clear in these passages and in the NT that Jesus’s is re using the 10 commandments , but there were clarifications or additions and in some cases complete changes. And many changes in Leviticus law. Jesus approaches the law quite differently than Moses.

Christ did not simply do away with the law, ignore it, or destroy it, he satisfied it, completed it or fulfilled it. Jesus is the substance of the shadows, the completion of law, the greater promise.

John 15:10 New King James Version (NKJV)

10 If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love.

John 14:21

If Jesus had said nothing and simply lived in sinless obedience to the Mosaic Law, then he would have still taught his followers how to obey it by example, and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22). If you believed that he preached what he practiced, then you should believe that what he commanded was the same as what he lived out, and part of all that he taught his disciple to teach their disciples in the Great Commission.

While the New Covenant is based on better promises and has a superior mediator, it does not say that it is based on superior laws because that we require following a superior God with superior holiness, righteousness, and goodness. If doing a particular action was in accordance with God's righteousness before Messiah came, but after he came that action is no longer in accordance with God's righteousness, then God's righteousness has changed, but God's righteousness is eternal and does not change, and so all of His righteous laws are likewise eternal and do not change (Psalms 119:160).
 
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,433
4,605
Hudson
✟284,522.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Disagree. I know what love is, and don't need someone to define it for me. If someone needs "love" to be defined for them, then feel free to offer your "rules of love" but I doubt you're going to get many people needing you to explain love to them.

If someone correctly understands and lives according to the principle of love, then they will do things that are examples of that principle. In other words, they will live according to all the rules of love. God gave these rules of love because we have all transgressed them and have needed them explained. In other words, we know what love is because God has defined it and first loved us. We can not correctly live according to the principle of love while disregarding God's rules for how to love.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

John Hyperspace

UnKnown ReMember
Oct 3, 2016
2,385
1,272
53
Hyperspace
✟35,143.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
God gave these rules of love because we have all transgressed them and have needed them explained.

What you're proposing is that without the explanation "do no murder" people wouldn't be able to comprehend that love doesn't murder others. How is it that the Gentiles "which have not the law/explanation in stone" fulfilled by nature the law "written in their hearts" - "by nature" means no one needed "love" explained to them; it was understood naturally through conscience. The only people who need love "legally explained", are people who have no love; no conscience.

If everyone loved one another, we wouldn't need legislation forbidding murder upon penalty of law. Only the people who have no love would actually murder someone else, and those people are the only reason legislation forbidding murder exists in law. What, do you think love didn't exist before Sinai? Do you think a little child who says "Love you" is wrong since they clearly do not perceive the words of the Sinai covenant and have not had "love" explained and defined, and codified by a list of rules?

Do you seriously think that only Christians and Jews "know love"? That people who lived in lands outside of Judea were incapable of knowing what love is?
 
Upvote 0

Edmond Smith

Well-Known Member
Jan 5, 2016
514
88
59
United States
✟14,316.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
Nearly everyone I know kind of likes this commandment but thinks that is is only one piece of the ginormous Christian religion puzzle. They cannot see how doing this could possibly be the crux of the meaning of life.
One of the main reasons is the teaching that Christians are the loved, chosen, holy people and that everyone else is trash because they will be thrown into the eternal boiling pot of sulfur soup.

If we think that our enemies are going to be tortured forever because they would not join our group then how is it possible to really love them? The church teaches that "loving" them means presenting our version of religion and offering them a chance to stop being who they are and be like God (meaning us). If we think of anyone as common or unclean (read Acts 10:28) then we simply cannot truly love them.

First you have to understand what type of Love God has. There are four types of love mentioned in the bible.
1. Agape - God's Love
2. Philo - Brotherly Love
3. Stirgo - Parental Love
4. eros - Erotic Love.

If you take away the Agape love. The rest wouldn't happen. God loves His creation. That's every one. Yet he hates sin. He loved us enough that even while we sinned. To send His son to die for us, to take the wrath that we should receive.
Those who are enemies of God. Are those who rebel against Him and live in their sins. That refuse to believe in Him. They will be punished for the sins that they commit.
God does Love us all, but He is also good, righteous, and just. If he wasn't just, then he wouldn't be any of the others either. Because he is good, he must punish the sin. They aren't punished because they don't join a group, they aren't punished because they dressed different, or walk funny, or for any other reason. We are punished for one reason and one reason only...Sin.
When we sin, we sin directly toward God. But as said earlier, because He loved us so much he send his son to die for us.
 
Upvote 0

JohannaSK

Active Member
Aug 28, 2015
73
33
✟10,488.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
How then do you propose that the Gentiles, which do not have 1-10 at all, were still fulfilling the work of the law "written in their hearts": Romans 2:14-15? No one with love in their heart needs the 10 commandments to define their actions; the Gentiles certainly didn't. Neither do we.

Or, why do you suppose the apostles wrote to the Gentiles: Acts 21:25, Acts 15:29? Why didn't the apostles list the ten commandments?



Which is just a way of saying, "If you love Me, love others as I have loved you": John 13:34-35, John 15:12, John 15:17, Romans 13:8, 1 John 3:11, 1 John 4:7, 1 John 4:11-12, 2 John 1:5. It is simple.

But even for the gentiles who love by nature and have never even heard what the Scripture (including the Torah) say, their love still reflects what The Scripture say. If it doesn't, then it's not love. So there's no conflict between what the Scripture say and how one truly loves.

For example, if there is a gentile, non-Christian man who identifies himself as a homosexual, and he says: "I know what love is! I feel it in my heart, and I'm loving my male partner by having sexual relations with him", his personal definition of "love" contradicts the law of God expressed in the Torah. Therefore it isn't true love which Paul meant.

Love in the Scripture is both descriptive (sometimes we fill the description of true love without any conscious effort) and rescriptive (sometimes we need God's word to know what's good and make an effort to do the right thing). Even those gentiles that Paul was refering to in Romans 2:14-15, were not perfect (Romans 3:23), but rather "behaving alright" even without the knowledge about what is demanded in the Mosaic law.
 
Upvote 0

Jeepneytravel

Active Member
Feb 11, 2017
210
81
85
Asia Pacific
✟33,173.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The old testament law which you are referring to is the Moses law, which Moses himself wrote...that contained the 600 sacrificial, circumcision, cleanliness, food, festival, feast law, which ended in Acts 15 with the exception of the four mentioned...
The law of God, the Ten commandments which God wrote himself on the stone tables are eternal, and the moral code for mankind..and are in fact the law of love...love your neighbour neighbour and love God...Hebrews 10 God says "I will write my laws on their hearts and minds and i will be their God and they will be my people"
Jesus said in Matthew 19.17 "to enter into life keep the commandments' and He goes on to mention the ten commandments.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

pescador

Wise old man
Site Supporter
Nov 29, 2011
8,530
4,776
✟498,844.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Jesus taught obedience to the Mosaic Law both by word and by sinless example, so I see no grounds to think that the Law of Christ is anything others that the way that he taught to obey the Mosaic Law.

Jesus died so that we would not be under the yoke of the Mosaic law. He taught people to love God with all their hearts, minds, and strengths, and to love their neighbors as themselves. That's it, nothing more.
 
Upvote 0