Removing the laws of God- what does it really mean?

Yeshua HaDerekh

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it
May 9, 2013
11,459
3,771
Eretz
✟317,562.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
So then you like the 1050 but you don't like the 613?? Is the Bible about picking out the parts that "you like"

That has nothing to do with what I wrote. You are implying things I never said. Read what I said. Again are you a woman? Can you keep any of the "613" that are ONLY for woman? Or priests? There is no Temple either. You can ONLY keep those that apply to you at the present time.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,298
10,590
Georgia
✟909,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Those are not new. :) God has always wanted us to love each other.

They are ‘re-freshed’. In other words, Jesus was emphasizing them - under the new revelation of Him - giving them a deeper understanding.

1 John 2:7 Beloved, I am not writing a new commandment to you, but an old commandment which you have had from the beginning; the old commandment is the word which you have heard. 8 On the other hand, I am writing a new commandment to you, which is true in Him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true Light is already shining. 9 The one who says that he is in the Light and yet hates his brother or sister is in the darkness until now. 10 The one who loves his brother remains in the Light, and there is nothing in him to cause stumbling.

Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbor as yourself" -- still valid in Matt 19... still valid in Rom 13
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nathan@work
Upvote 0

Yeshua HaDerekh

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it
May 9, 2013
11,459
3,771
Eretz
✟317,562.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Rom 8:4-12 says that only wicked "do not submit to the Law of God and neither indeed CAN they"

What is your point? That you can keep all the "613"? You can't...that was my point. No one person ever could.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,298
10,590
Georgia
✟909,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
We were talking about the "613". Are you a woman Bob?

So then you like the 1050 but you don't like the 613?? Is the Bible about picking out the parts that "you like"

That has nothing to do with what I wrote. You are implying things I never said.

ok you are right - I missed that.

Read what I said. Again are you a woman?

I would not be a woman in the NT or OT.

Can you keep any of the "613" that are ONLY for woman? Or priests? There is no Temple either. You can ONLY keep those that apply to you at the present time.

I cannot break even one of the 613 laws that pertain to a woman, either in OT or NT.

I cannot break any laws that pertain to a Nazarite or the high priest who was not to rend his priestly garments since I am not the high priest.

Heb 10:4-12 makes the case that all laws regarding animal sacrifices ended at the cross - because the type meets antitype at the cross -- "Christ our Passover has been slain" 1 Cor 5.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,298
10,590
Georgia
✟909,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
What is your point? That you can keep all the "613"? You can't...that was my point. No one person ever could.

the example you gave regarding women and priests - is merely an example of a law I cannot break because it would not be possible for me to break it.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Religiot
Upvote 0

Religiot

Well-Known Member
Mar 15, 2020
1,046
384
Private
✟29,006.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Apparently it does:

"Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord: but this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more." --Jeremiah 31:31-34

"For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: and they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away." --Hebrews 8:7-13

The old covenant is not God's laws, but contained them, they are now transferred to the new covenant, and contained in our hearts--when you realize that, you'll get all the rest, guaranteed.
 
Upvote 0

Yeshua HaDerekh

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it
May 9, 2013
11,459
3,771
Eretz
✟317,562.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
So then you like the 1050 but you don't like the 613?? Is the Bible about picking out the parts that "you like"

I would not be a woman in the NT or OT.

I cannot break even one of the 613 laws that pertain to a woman, either in OT or NT.

I cannot break any laws that pertain to a Nazarite or the high priest who was not to rend his priestly garments since I am not the high priest.

Heb 10:4-12 makes the case that all laws regarding animal sacrifices ended at the cross - because the type meets antitype at the cross -- "Christ our Passover has been slain" 1 Cor 5.

So if you are not a woman, how can you keep a law that ONLY pertains to a woman? You can't...so as I said, you can ONLY keep laws that pertain to you at the present...
 
Upvote 0

Yeshua HaDerekh

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it
May 9, 2013
11,459
3,771
Eretz
✟317,562.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
the example you gave regarding women and priests - is merely an example of a law I cannot break because it would not be possible for me to break it.

What? Are you serious? I said no one person can ever keep ALL of the "613" nor ever was required to. They are examples of laws you can not break but can not keep either...that was my point...
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,298
10,590
Georgia
✟909,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
What? Are you serious? I said no one person can ever keep ALL of the "613" nor ever was required to. They are examples of laws you can not break but can not keep either...

It is not logical to argue that a man failed to keep a law that only applies to women. More precisely the man cannot break that law "by definition" since it does not apply to him and makes/applies no restriction at all to him... by definition. Without any restriction at all applied to him by that law - he cannot be in violation of it.

If a law is made that a fighter pilot must not drink alcohol within 4 days of flying -- do you "break that law" by not being a jet pilot? - no you do not regardless of whether you drank alcohol or not - you would not be in violation of a law for fighter pilots.

1 John 3:4 states that "sin IS transgression of the law" - the only way you can fail to keep a law is to fail to comply with its demands on you - if it makes no demands at all on you - you cannot be in violation of it - you cannot be judged as having failed to comply with its demand upon your actions.
 
Upvote 0

Nathan@work

Always ready :)
Feb 19, 2021
1,025
360
45
Garfield
✟27,017.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Some people think so - but Jesus said Satan was a liar.



If the only way to know about the atom bomb was to have one dropped on you - then we would never know it - since nobody can survive that.

If the only way to know that someone would die if exposed to the vacuum of space is to be shoved out of the space station without any protection - then only the dead would really "know" it. At least for a few seconds before they died.

Every day life tells us that there is no such thing as having to shoot yourself before you can actually know that shooting yourself will be a bad thing.

There is no argument from me that mankind knows of good and of evil.

The discernment between, the knowledge between.

Only God is good. Yes?

Mankind knows of God. That there is a God. But mankind doesn’t ‘know’ God - not until God comes to live in us.

Once we have the Spirit living in us He teaches us.
 
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

Yeshua HaDerekh

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it
May 9, 2013
11,459
3,771
Eretz
✟317,562.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
It is not logical to argue that a man failed to keep a law that only applies to women. More precisely the man cannot break that law "by definition" since it does not apply to him and makes/applies no restriction at all to him... by definition.

I am not the one making that argument. And a man can not keep a law that by definition does not apply to him...that was my point...
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,298
10,590
Georgia
✟909,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
So if you are not a woman, how can you keep a law that ONLY pertains to a woman?

How can I possibly be in violation of it - since it makes no demands at all on me in that case?? By default I am in perfect harmony and compliance with it. I am complying with all of its specifications for me - which are in this case "nothing".
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Religiot
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,298
10,590
Georgia
✟909,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Mankind knows of God. That there is a God. But mankind doesn’t ‘know’ God - not until God comes to live in us.

Once we have the Spirit living in us He teaches us.

You are arguing about degrees of knowing the something vs experiencing the short end of it. The degree to which you know about dying of cancer - increases as you get cancer and die of it. But that sort of knowing is useless. Nothing is gained by first having to die of cancer to obtain that level of knowledge. And it is not likely that the Holy Spirit will drag you through the process of dying of cancer just so you can gain that knowledge.
 
Upvote 0

Religiot

Well-Known Member
Mar 15, 2020
1,046
384
Private
✟29,006.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
In other words, one ‘law’ superseded another ‘law’.

The ‘law’ Christ gave to take up his mat was greater than the ‘law’ to not carry it on the Sabbath.
No, not at all: the Pharisees were adding to God's laws their traditions, and failing to keep God's laws by the same.

Christ did not command the man to sin, but to move along, according to the law--for it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath, as the Spirit says through Isaiah.

The fallacy of this misunderstanding is plain, not only by what the Spirit says, but by the Lord's own words, for later that very day He finds Him, and commands him not to continue in sin, lest something worse should come upon him.

--Folks, I know most of you don't realize this now, but you're not arguing against us lawful folks about our opinions, but against the actual commands of the Lord.

Please reconsider what you're doing, cause this conversation is devolving into allegations of sin against the Lord Himself, a thing so absurd that it repels my mind to no end, yet here y'all are, actually considering it!
 
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

Yeshua HaDerekh

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it
May 9, 2013
11,459
3,771
Eretz
✟317,562.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
How can I possibly be in violation of it - since it makes no demands at all on me in that case??

I never said it does. Others here are saying you must keep all "613"...my posts were to them...
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Religiot
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,298
10,590
Georgia
✟909,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I never said it does. Others here are saying you must keep all "613"...my posts were to them...

ok understood. I think I missed a few posts in that regard. Sorry about that.

Maybe we can all agree that if you check by default "comply" on any law that does not pertain to you -- then 613 is not a problem at all.

If the OT were filled with 612 laws for parents of small children and you were single all your life - would you be in violation of any of them? Why wouldn't that be an easy case for "Sure I complied with all of them"?
 
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
25,096
6,100
North Carolina
✟276,593.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
1. No text says "The Sabbath was fulfilled in Christ"
No text says, "God is sovereign," but it is presented throughout the Bible; e.g., Da 4:35.
So let's get past "no text says/states."

Into what rest do we enter, what does it consist of, in the NT (Heb 4:9-11)?
It's not Canaan (Heb 4:8).
2. No text says "the Sabbath was a shadow of things to come"
What is the nature of, and the rest from, in "another day remaining, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God" after Canaan, that we "are to make every effort to enter"? (Heb 4:8-11)
3. Heb 4:9 9 Consequently, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God.

"Remains" from when ?
From the incomplete rest of Canaan into which Joshua led them (Heb 4:8).
Heb 4:9 has it remaining as it was at the time of David.
Remaining, as in "still available," for the people of God (Heb 4:9) to make every effort to enter (Heb 4:11).

What is the nature of this rest, and what is it a rest from?
1. No Christian records from the first century show week-day-1 as a weekly day of rest and worship.
2. Didache is of unknown date and authorship
"Many scholars have dated the text to the late 2nd century CE, a view still held today, other scholars have the Didache might go back to the first century. The document is a composite work, and the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls with its Manual of Discipline provided evidence of development over a considerable period of time, beginning as a Jewish catechetical work which was then developed into a church manual. Additionally, apart from two minuscule fragments, the Greek text of the Didache has only survived in a single manuscript, the Codex Hierosolymitanus. Dating the document is thus made difficult both by the lack of hard evidence and its composite character.
The Didache may have been compiled in its present form as late as 150,

Some feel more comfortable with “The Didache a Christian manual compiled before 300AD.”
A date of 150 is awfully good evidence regarding the NT church's practice of worship on Sunday.
Even then - we have not Bible text saying "week-day-1 is the Lord's Day" - which would be a great statement to make in the Bible of one were going to introduce such a doctrine in scripture.
So you don't think the Lord's Day is the Lord's day of resurrection, but is the Sabbath, and they changed the name Sabbath to the Lord's Day?

C'mon, guy you're too informed for that, I expected more of you.
And no more, "no text says," which demonstrates nothing, as in the sovereignty of God which also "no text says."
 
Last edited:
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

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,298
10,590
Georgia
✟909,568.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
John 15:22
If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have been guilty of sin,
but now they have no excuse for their sin.

So they were in the dark about Gods obsolete laws?

Hebrews 7:18-19
For on the one hand, a former commandment is set aside because of its weakness and uselessness (for the law made nothing perfect); but on the other hand, a better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God.

Hebrews 7:11-12
Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron? For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well.

Heb 7 talks about laws for the priesthood changing. Heb 8:1-5 says the "main point" of that is that we have a High Priest in heaven.. and that "if Christ were on Earth He would not be a priest at all".

It has nothing at all to do with making it ok to take God's name in vain after the cross unlike before the cross. The moral law of God remains as Eph 6:1-2 points out.


Hebrews 9:15
Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.

Heb 8 says that Christ was giving His Law at Sinai and that the New Covenant is the one specified by Jeremiah in Jer 31:31-34 "I will write My laws on their heart and mind"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Religiot
Upvote 0