(Moved) The law. Is it done away with? Is it, really?

christopheralan88

Active Member
Apr 20, 2014
111
34
✟12,652.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The one flock
does not indicate Israel in any way. The one Shepherd is Jesus and not Israel. The Christian listens to the Shepherd as verse 5 says. There are some other very interesting statements by Jesus in this chapter. We have another proof text failure here. One body in what or Who? I read one body in Jesus. I do not read one body in Israel.It seems the highlighted part of the quoted text is ignored. The bolded one body part of the text indicates what is happening here is nothing more than a presentation of texts with one body easily found in any concordance. It is not proof that the gentile becomes part of Israel. Nothing more than a listing of verses with the word one body in them. The text says both Jews and Greeks are baptized into one body. It does not say Jews are Israel and Greeks become Israel. The "one body" is a concept picture of Christians, not Israel.Considering the discussion this is nothing more than a general off topic quote with the phrase "one body." The context of the chapter is clearly discussing the function(s) of the Church. The verse does not claim anything about being Israel.This verse says nothing about either group being or becoming Israel. Just another proof text failure.One what? I read one Lord, one faith and one baptism. I do not read one Israel. What does Mat 28 say?

18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Where does the above say anything about teaching and requiring the law to be kept or becoming part of Israel? The above is in full compliance with the promise given to Abraham about blessing all nations. The above says nothing about becoming Israel.Thank-you for quoting this verse. What body does it say we are called into? I read Christ meaning Jesus Christ. I do not read we are called into Israel.We did I say or imply such a fool thing?I did not say Israel is rejected. That is not part of the discussion.They are graft into what? I read their own olive tree by the quoted verse. I fully understand "olive tree" is used to represent Israel. The discussion here is about the Root of the Olive Tree. The discussion of the subject is not Israel. The discussion is about Jesus, the Root. I have shown the Christian abides (lives) in Jesus and He in us by His own words found in John 15. This has been rejected. I wonder why.Not part of the discussion. At least not on my part I am discussing the Root, Jesus.Verse 12 says nothing about being part of the commonwealth of Israel. The verse also mentions being excluded from the covenants of promise meaning the covenants made wtih Abraham.

Verse 14 says the middle wall of partition was broken down. This wall of partition is the covenant made with Israel at Sinai which was for a limited time (Gal 3:19).

Verse 16 says nothing about being part of Israel.

Verse 19 says: but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

It does not say fellowcitizens of Israel. I believe I asked it to be considered who the saints are in Hebrews. My mistake. I should have asked about our elders are. I consider them as saints. Of course I am talking about the list in chapter 11 many of which are not part of Israel. NTL they are considered the righteous and referred to as saints by us these days. All prior to and including Abraham are not part (citizens) of Israel, yet are of the household of God.

bugkiller

So I guess what Jesus called the new covenant (testament) is being rejected.

bugkiller

Hey bugkiller,

I was on vacation for the beginning of this week, so I'm catching up on this thread now. Why do you say that what Jesus called the new covenant is being rejected? What are you referring to?
 
Upvote 0

Lee Stuvmen

If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature:
Jul 27, 2013
192
38
Visit site
✟30,417.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
It is well documented the unbelieving Jews chased the Christians from the synagogue and Christians worshiped on Sunday long before the RCC came to power.

That is a fairy tale regarding Sunday worship whose sole purpose is to keep you from seeing truth.

Scripture and human history tell a much different story my friend!


Have you ever heard of a MYSTERY RELIGION that was rising up inside the Roman Empire at the same time as early Christianity?

A MYSTERY RELIGION of Pagan Sun Worshipers that copied EVERY FACET of the TRUE early church?

Of course you haven't,

Almost no one has!

Why?

Because Satan does not what the truth to be known regarding the 4th Beast of Daniel!



And because if you had that information, you would be singing a different tune.



The people that thought the world was flat were not stupid people. They just lacked certain information.


Learn the TRUTH, then see if you still believe as you do my brother.

pontifexmaximuschristianity.blogspot.com
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Lee Stuvmen

If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature:
Jul 27, 2013
192
38
Visit site
✟30,417.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
i am beginning to believe you are SDA or Church of GOD 7th day.

I am not a member of any worldly organized religion, because ALL religions of the world twist the truth to fit into what they want the truth to be, not what the truth is.

If I was SDA I would be pounding the table demanding that Mosaic Law is still in effect. And it actually is, for anyone foolish enough to bind themselves to it and separate themselves from Christ's grace.

May I ask where you learned what you think is the truth?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

christopheralan88

Active Member
Apr 20, 2014
111
34
✟12,652.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Hi BK, it is so good to have you back. For some reason I knew you would not stay away. I welcome your responses to, at first glance, what is being presented on the forum. The proof in Jer31 that we are under a new and better covenant is naturally found in the New Testament. The adversary will try to make Christians believe we are still under the laws given to Israel. Those laws had nothing to do with our salvation. They were made for Israel only and God was showing them that that covenant would end and an new one would emerge. If it were the same covenant then I don't care where it is written it would be the same one just warmed over. The evidence that we have a new covenant is as clear as the nose on my face, but to Messianics, who have been programed to believe otherwise, it is foreign. How they can miss your quoting of Eph 2:14-15 is beyond me. 14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15 having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

The adversary will try to make Christians believe we are still under the laws given to Israel. Those laws had nothing to do with our salvation.

When did I say that keeping the Law is our salvation? If I did, then please quote it and I will clarify. The Law is not how we are saved. We are saved by Jesus's blood as He is our Passover lamb. I'm simply debating what His commands are - the Law or something different, since we are supposed to walk in them if we love Him (John 14:21)
 
Upvote 0

christopheralan88

Active Member
Apr 20, 2014
111
34
✟12,652.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Then Acts must not be true. Not a single one of the full gentile converts were required to keep the law per the Council at Jerusalem (Acts 15) and no record about it such as the Philippian jailer in chapter 16 being required to keep the law for or as a result of salvation.There is much trouble discussing this passage here. But I will say that Jesus did not teach keeping the law is a requirement of or for salvation. I reference Jn 1:17, chapter 3 and 15:10.Now if you want to say a prophet like Moses, I would say the passage you quote is a reference to Paul. Jesus is God, not a prophet. Paul did the explanation of the new covenant like Moses did the covenant made at Sinai. Good calls Paul a chosen vessel in Acts.I would be much more careful here. Jeremiah said the covenant would change and Jesus (God) testified it did.

bugkiller

Then Acts must not be true. Not a single one of the full gentile converts were required to keep the law per the Council at Jerusalem (Acts 15) and no record about it such as the Philippian jailer in chapter 16 being required to keep the law for or as a result of salvation.

Hey bugkiller,

Acts 15 is actually how my dialogue with Bob S started.

If you don't mind, I'd like to begin our discussion with this reply.

If you would, please treat me as if I'm a Berean Jew and you are Paul (Acts 17:11). I'm going to test what you say to Scripture as Scripture was defined at that time - the Tanakh ("Old Testament") since there was no "New Testament" writings yet.

That said, bugkiller, could you tell me about this Jesus I'm hearing about, specifically why you think He's done away with/changed the Law?
 
Upvote 0

klutedavid

Well-Known Member
Dec 7, 2013
9,346
4,381
Sydney, Australia.
✟244,844.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Neither OT or NT required that gentiles be circumcised to be saved... we both knew that... right?
Hello Bob.

The law requires physical circumcision, anyone under the law must be circumcised. Sin is transgression of the law, therefore to not become circumcised is not obeying the law. Bob, do you understand this?

How could you possibly claim that circumcision is not law?
 
Upvote 0

Dig4truth

Newbie
Aug 23, 2014
563
132
✟38,877.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
Hey bugkiller,

Acts 15 is actually how my dialogue with Bob S started.

If you don't mind, I'd like to begin our discussion with this reply.

If you would, please treat me as if I'm a Berean Jew and you are Paul (Acts 17:11). I'm going to test what you say to Scripture as Scripture was defined at that time - the Tanakh ("Old Testament") since there was no "New Testament" writings yet.

That said, bugkiller, could you tell me about this Jesus I'm hearing about, specifically why you think He's done away with/changed the Law?


Im not sure bugkiller thinks the OT is Scripture anymore. I hope I'm wrong.

Marcion lives on today. So do the Nicolaitans and Gnostics.

 
Upvote 0

klutedavid

Well-Known Member
Dec 7, 2013
9,346
4,381
Sydney, Australia.
✟244,844.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Hello Bob.

I will print the verse again.

Romans 2:27
And though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law?

You said.
In Rom 2:27 the term means "scripture"... "having the Bible"
That is definitely incorrect, the Greek word means, 'letter', that is the written law. In other words Paul is saying, you who have the written law and circumcision, the Jews.
But in some other texts it is also used to contrast a mere surface reading of it - vs a true acceptance of the text.
We are discussing Romans 2:27, not other texts.

Anyone under the law must obey the letter of the law firstly, otherwise, sin is transgression of the letter of the law.
Lets take "do not take God's name in vain" Exodus 20:7 for example.

To live in rebellion against the spirit of the law - and thus to only attempt some outward appearance of conformity to the letter of the law would mean that you still choose to take God's name in vain but try to hide it from others.
What you have said has nothing to do with obeying the letter of the law. All Jews were required by law to not take God's name in vain. After you have strictly complied with the letter of the law, then you can concern yourself with the spirit of the law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bugkiller
Upvote 0

bugkiller

Well-Known Member
May 16, 2015
17,773
2,634
✟80,400.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Hey bugkiller,

Acts 15 is actually how my dialogue with Bob S started.

If you don't mind, I'd like to begin our discussion with this reply.

If you would, please treat me as if I'm a Berean Jew and you are Paul (Acts 17:11). I'm going to test what you say to Scripture as Scripture was defined at that time - the Tanakh ("Old Testament") since there was no "New Testament" writings yet.

That said, bugkiller, could you tell me about this Jesus I'm hearing about, specifically why you think He's done away with/changed the Law?
Kool. I like that. Since you are a Berean type you like them have searched the Scripture and agree with Paul. That being the case, I do not think we have anything to debate. Everything I post agrees with Paul. Paul wrote -

6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. Rom 7

bugkiller
 
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

christopheralan88

Active Member
Apr 20, 2014
111
34
✟12,652.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Kool. I like that. Since you are a Berean type you like them have searched the Scripture and agree with Paul. That being the case, I do not think we have anything to debate. Everything I post agrees with Paul. Paul wrote -

6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. Rom 7

bugkiller

It's not going to be that easy lol.

Let's start here: The Law makes it clear it is a sin to add to/remove from the Law (Deuteronomy 4:2, 12:32, and 28:14). Even if someone performs signs/miracles and then gives us new commands that add to/remove from the Law, then that person is a false prophet and we should not listen to him - in fact he should die (Deuteronomy 13:1-5).

We also know that God cannot sin and sin is transgression of the Law. So, God cannot break His own Law, which means He cannot add to/remove from the Law. So, if you're saying that your version of Jesus is God and He altered the Law (added to/removed from) then He has 1) sinned, 2) would not be the sinless/"blemishless" Passover Lamb to atone for our sins, 3) would be worthy of death, and 4) would not be God.

Side Note: Just to clarify, I feel like I need to say that I believe that Jesus is the Messiah - what I'm saying above is all hypothetical based on the idea that Jesus changed the Law. I believe that He did not change the Law, but taught the Law. I just wanted to clarify that, so, if you would, please continue to pretend that I am a Berean Jew :).
 
Upvote 0

klutedavid

Well-Known Member
Dec 7, 2013
9,346
4,381
Sydney, Australia.
✟244,844.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
It's not going to be that easy lol.

Let's start here: The Law makes it clear it is a sin to add to/remove from the Law (Deuteronomy 4:2, 12:32, and 28:14). Even if someone performs signs/miracles and then gives us new commands that add to/remove from the Law, then that person is a false prophet and we should not listen to him - in fact he should die (Deuteronomy 13:1-5).

We also know that God cannot sin and sin is transgression of the Law. So, God cannot break His own Law, which means He cannot add to/remove from the Law. So, if you're saying that your version of Jesus is God and He altered the Law (added to/removed from) then He has 1) sinned, 2) would not be the sinless/"blemishless" Passover Lamb to atone for our sins, 3) would be worthy of death, and 4) would not be God.

Side Note: Just to clarify, I feel like I need to say that I believe that Jesus is the Messiah - what I'm saying above is all hypothetical based on the idea that Jesus changed the Law. I believe that He did not change the Law, but taught the Law. I just wanted to clarify that, so, if you would, please continue to pretend that I am a Berean Jew :).
Hello Christopheralan.

In the New Testament the phrase, 'the law', occurs often and describes at a minimum, the 613 laws commonly called the law of Moses. If God has not removed any of the law as you claim, then logically, the entire 613 laws are still in force for the Jews.

To claim that Gentiles are under these same 613 laws, would be an astonishing claim to make. I doubt whether anyone could provide sufficient scripture from the New Testament, to support such a remarkable claim.
 
Upvote 0

Dig4truth

Newbie
Aug 23, 2014
563
132
✟38,877.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
Hello Christopheralan.

In the New Testament the phrase, 'the law', occurs often and describes at a minimum, the 613 laws commonly called the law of Moses. If God has not removed any of the law as you claim, then logically, the entire 613 laws are still in force for the Jews.

To claim that Gentiles are under these same 613 laws, would be an astonishing claim to make. I doubt whether anyone could provide sufficient scripture from the New Testament, to support such a remarkable claim.



Many of the laws are conditional. If you are a man, if you are a woman, if you are a priest, if you are in the land, if you are a farmer, etc. However, God being God and knowing the end from the beginning, made a provision in the scriptures for a change of the Priesthood, which is referred to in the NT. So no, not all laws apply to all people.
 
Upvote 0

Dig4truth

Newbie
Aug 23, 2014
563
132
✟38,877.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
Most notably are the commands for the Temple and Temple service; sacrifices, oil and incense, priest services, procedures, restrictions and many more. Without a Temple, which is also spoken about in Scripture, as well as the scattering of God's people, you do not have this multitude of commands either.

Just wanted to clarify that - carry on.
 
Upvote 0

Lee Stuvmen

If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature:
Jul 27, 2013
192
38
Visit site
✟30,417.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The major source of confusion regarding grace and the Law and the Commandments stems from trying to make truth of Scripture fit into the bottomless pit of falsehood and half truths taught in Satan's world as truth.

A foundation of falsehood can never support truth trying to be placed upon it or fit within it!

But the human mind just can't seem to let go, once something has been accepted as truth.

So sad!
 
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

christopheralan88

Active Member
Apr 20, 2014
111
34
✟12,652.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Hello Christopheralan.

In the New Testament the phrase, 'the law', occurs often and describes at a minimum, the 613 laws commonly called the law of Moses. If God has not removed any of the law as you claim, then logically, the entire 613 laws are still in force for the Jews.

To claim that Gentiles are under these same 613 laws, would be an astonishing claim to make. I doubt whether anyone could provide sufficient scripture from the New Testament, to support such a remarkable claim.

Well, let's not get ahead of ourselves and be concerned with whether a claim is astonishing or not. Instead, let's just test a belief/tradition to Scripture (see below for how we're defining Scripture) and see where it leads.

All we're doing is role playing Acts 17:11 with the assumption that Paul taught the Berean Jews that Jesus is Messiah and Jesus changed the Law. I'm role playing the Berean Jew who is testing that claim to Scripture as Scripture was defined at that time - the Tanakh ("Old Testament"), since there were no "New Testament" writings yet.

And I agree with what Dig4truth stated above.
 
Upvote 0

Bob S

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Dec 5, 2015
4,582
2,203
88
Union County, TN
✟656,769.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Many of the laws are conditional. If you are a man, if you are a woman, if you are a priest, if you are in the land, if you are a farmer, etc. However, God being God and knowing the end from the beginning, made a provision in the scriptures for a change of the Priesthood, which is referred to in the NT. So no, not all laws apply to all people.

Please stop trying to make excuses. Jesus said not one jot or one tittle would pass from the law until all is fulfilled and you don't believe Jesus fulfilled all He came to do. In that light you do not have any excuse for not having ALL the law enforced whether it personally pertains to you or not. Actually your answer is quite comical in light of Jesus words. You would have to rebuild the temple and set up the levitical priesthood. As it is because you tell us we have to observe the law we can see that you are really telling us to do as you say not as you do.

Jesus did come and do what the Father had Him do. He fulfilled all of the law. He brought it to an end at Calvary, "it is finished" He said. That was the end of the covenant of laws and the beginning of the covenant of grace. Amen, Thank you Jesus.
 
Upvote 0

Dig4truth

Newbie
Aug 23, 2014
563
132
✟38,877.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
Please stop trying to make excuses. Jesus said not one jot or one tittle would pass from the law until all is fulfilled and you don't believe Jesus fulfilled all He came to do. In that light you do not have any excuse for not having ALL the law enforced whether it personally pertains to you or not. Actually your answer is quite comical in light of Jesus words. You would have to rebuild the temple and set up the levitical priesthood. As it is because you tell us we have to observe the law we can see that you are really telling us to do as you say not as you do.

Jesus did come and do what the Father had Him do. He fulfilled all of the law. He brought it to an end at Calvary, "it is finished" He said. That was the end of the covenant of laws and the beginning of the covenant of grace. Amen, Thank you Jesus.


You've missed some of the finer points.
In Scripture it speaks about the change of the priesthood.
In Scripture it speaks about the destruction of the Temple and the scattering of God's people Israel.

If these things are included in Scripture then it is Scripture.

Are you trying to claim that God cannot suspend the Temple and its service if He foretold it to us in Scripture?

Are you suggesting that God cannot change the priesthood if He said it was going to happen in Scripture? Because that's what I'm hearing.

And I never said that you have to uphold the law. That is up to each individual to decide to obey God or not.

Yeshua has not fulfilled all of the law and the prophets yet. His second coming and subsequent judgment is still pending.

But let's pretend that He has, we still have heaven and earth here and that is part of the stipulation also! Do you agree or have you overlooked that part of the Scripture?

Believe me, there is nothing comical about this.
 
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

christopheralan88

Active Member
Apr 20, 2014
111
34
✟12,652.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Please stop trying to make excuses. Jesus said not one jot or one tittle would pass from the law until all is fulfilled and you don't believe Jesus fulfilled all He came to do. In that light you do not have any excuse for not having ALL the law enforced whether it personally pertains to you or not. Actually your answer is quite comical in light of Jesus words. You would have to rebuild the temple and set up the levitical priesthood. As it is because you tell us we have to observe the law we can see that you are really telling us to do as you say not as you do.

Jesus did come and do what the Father had Him do. He fulfilled all of the law. He brought it to an end at Calvary, "it is finished" He said. That was the end of the covenant of laws and the beginning of the covenant of grace. Amen, Thank you Jesus.

Hey Bob S,

I, and I'm sure Dig4truth will agree, believe Jesus fulfilled all He came to do, but I differ with you on what it was He fulfilled - or rather what "fulfill" means.

Please consider:

First, a Berean Jew would definitely not accept a Jesus that altered the Law as Messiah, because He would have sinned per Deuteronomy 4:2, 12:32, 13:1-5, and 28:14.

Second, it's obvious that not all the Law applies to everyone - do you see Jesus having to keep the menstrual laws? Of course not, because He's not a woman.

Lastly, the temple, Levitical priesthood, circumcision, and sacrificial system will all be present in the future. I understand that may be a shocker, but read Ezekiel 40-48. The temple that is described there has not been built yet.

Some noteworthy points about the Ezekiel 40-48 temple is that:

1) the glory of God fills this temple (Ezekiel 44:4) (it is His dwelling place)
2) those who are uncircumcised in flesh or heart (regardless of whether they are a child of Israel or a foreigner) will not enter the temple (Ezekiel 44:9) (but of course, you can become circumcised in both heart and flesh and then enter the temple)
3) the Levitical priesthood will return (Ezekiel 44:10-31)
4) Passover and the Festival of Unleavened Bread is celebrated (Ezekiel 45:21)
5) sacrifices/offerings will be done once again (Ezekiel 44:27-29, 45:17, 42:13-14, 42:22).

Remember that almost all of these verses I've quoted are written as God's direct quotes to Ezekiel. God is literally saying these things directly to Ezekiel.


Please don't think that I'm saying that Jesus was not your ultimate sacrifice by which you are saved. That's not what I'm saying by quoting Ezekiel 40-48. You are saved by His sacrifice. In my opinion, if our sin is wiped away/forgiven, then we won't have to do sin offerings - but the nations apart from Israel (Israel includes Gentile believers) will. Instead, we will be allowed to make thanksgiving/peace offerings to God (Leviticus 3).
 
Upvote 0