Did Christ at the cross end all the laws?

[Akita Suggagaki]

You do realize that God's laws were not predicated on histories, needs or expectations; i.e.,
predicated on man, they were predicated on God's purpose.

That does not mean context is not important. This is especially so when trying to determine which laws gentiles ought to follow.

 

[Clare73]

People often read the Bible as if it is addressed to them personally. That is sometimes fine for inspiration. But without context we come away with quotes pointing all kinds of directions and we sit there trying to make sense of it all and often disagree. All I ask is that before quoting scripture, as if it proves whatever point you want to make, ask yourself
who the intended audience is. Especially in the early Christian church and the Law. It makes a big difference.

You do realize that God's laws were not predicated on histories, needs or expectations; i.e.,
predicated on man, they were predicated on God's purpose.

That does not mean context is not important. This is especially so
when trying to determine which laws gentiles ought to follow.

The NT is to Christians, Jew and Gentile alike, the commands are the same for both
regarding application of the laws.

 

[pasifika]

Not the whole story - Paul has already told us that the Law produced the sin. And in the very verse you refer to, Paul implicates the Law as effectively enabling sin to produce covetousness.

The law is holy, and the commandment is righteous and good...Romans 7:12

The only problem with the old covenant law and commandments etc is that it's based on man's work Not God. (This is due to the covenant agreement between God and the children of Israel In Sinai)..Exodus 19

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

The NT is to Christians, Jew and Gentile alike, the commands are the same for both
regarding application of the laws.

Then what was the point and purpose of the Jerusalem Council if not excusing gentiles from initiation (circumcision) into Torah, keeping of The Law?

“For it was the Holy Spirit’s decision—and ours—not to place further burdens on you beyond these requirements.” (Acts‬ ‭15:28)

Why would they be excused from this initiation if everything else applied to them as to the Jewish Christians who still kept the law diligently?

 

[Clare73]

.

 

[Clare73]

Then what was the point and purpose of the Jerusalem Council if not
excusing gentiles from initiation (circumcision) into Torah, keeping of The Law?

“For it was the Holy Spirit’s decision—and ours—not to place further burdens on you beyond these requirements.” (Acts‬ ‭15:28)

1) There was never a requirement for Gentiles to be circumcised, from which they were then excused.
2) There was insistence by the Judaizers that Gentiles be circumcised for salvation.
3) There was a ruling by the Council against the Judaizers.

The purpose of the Council at Jerusalem was to address the problem in Antioch, the leading city of the combined provinces of Syria and Cilicia in which there were many Jews, where the Jews in the Christian congregations were repulsed by Gentile practices of eating blood and food sacrificed to idols, as well as their particular weakness regarding sexual immorality. The regulations of the Council:
a) to abstain from food offered to idols,
b) to abstain from the meat of strangled animals (where the blood had not been drained),
c) to abstain from blood
were a temporary accommodation to the Jews in those provinces only for the sake of peace and harmony between Gentile and Jew in the congregations. They were temporary and did not apply to the other churches (Romans 14:14, Romans 14:17-19; 1 Corinthians 8:4-8).

Why would they be excused from this initiation if everything else applied to them as to the Jewish Christians who still kept the law diligently?

The NT nowhere requires such initiation.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

And I think someone already pointed out that in order for gentiles to celebrate Passover they had to be circumcised. So uncircumcised Christians did not have to celebrate Passover. And yet they are still "grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root" without circumcision and Passover. How else might they differ from the Jewish believers?

 

[Clare73]

And I think someone already pointed out that in order for gentiles to celebrate Passover they had to be circumcised. So uncircumcised Christians did not have to celebrate Passover.

Circumcised Jewish Christians likewise did not have to celebrate Passover.

And yet they are still "grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root" without circumcision and Passover.

"Grafted in" to the one olive tree of God's people, the church, is by faith in Jesus Christ, not by circumcision (works).

How else might they differ from the Jewish believers?

In the new covenant, requirements for Gentile believers never differed from requirements for Jewish believers.
However, the Gentile Christians in Antioch did temporarily abstain from allowed practices because of the sensitivities of the new Jewish Christians there (Acts 15).

 

[Guojing]

Thank you for the information

When you talk about Peter, James and John writing instructions to the nation of Israel, do you mean they were writing to believers or unbelievers within the nation of Israel? Or both?

Galatians 2:7-9

Both groups, Jews call fellow Jews as "brethren".

 

[HARK!]

MOD HAT ON

THIS THREAD WAS CLEANED​

THIS WAS THE FIRST THING THAT YOU SAW WHEN YOU READ THE OP.:​

This thread is not intended to debate the 4th commandment specifically so please do not discuss/debate the Sabbath in this thread as it is not allowed per the forum guidelines.

EVERY LAST ONE OF YOU WHO BROUGHT UP THE SUBJECT OF THE SABBATH, VIOLATED THE RULE OF BEING OFF TOPIC!

THEN YOU WERE REPEATEDLY REMINDED THAT YOU WERE VIOLATING THIS RULE:
​

All threads which debate the Sabbath as 7th day or Sunday will be moved by staff to Sabbath & the Law forum. That forum was set up for that purpose.

Sabbath discussions and the Mark of the Beast

I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TIMES YOU NEED TO BE KINDLY REMINDED; BUT IF YOU NEED TO BE REMINDED AGAIN IN THIS THREAD; IT PROBABLY WON'T BE A PLEASANT EXPERIENCE.

I DON'T WANT TO SEE THE WORD SABBATH IN THIS THREAD AGAIN, AFTER THIS POST, UNLESS IT IS PART OF YOUR USERNAME.


MOD HAT OFF​

 

[Leaf473]

Galatians 2:7-9

Both groups, Jews call fellow Jews as "brethren".

So here's what I'm hearing from what you've said so far:

Those in the body of Christ are free from the law.

Those in the nation of Israel are not free from the law.

It would seem to follow, then, that a person cannot be both part of the body of Christ and part of the nation of Israel.

Is that what you're saying? And is that a reasonable conclusion from what you're saying?

 

[Guojing]

So here's what I'm hearing from what you've said so far:

Those in the body of Christ are free from the law.

Those in the nation of Israel are not free from the law.

It would seem to follow, then, that a person cannot be both part of the body of Christ and part of the nation of Israel.

Is that what you're saying? And is that a reasonable conclusion from what you're saying?

Yes

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Yes

Are the saints in scriptures not the saved ones? That’s seems odd.

 

[Leaf473]

Yes

Well, it looks like we see that differently, then.

I think the body of Christ is composed of all believers, gentiles and Jews. (I'm assuming Jews is the same as The nation of Israel.)

Thanks for engaging, peace be with you!

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

OK, lets keep it general.
First, Did Christ at the Cross change ANY Jewish laws?

It seems most agree that "ceremonial" laws were changed for Christian Jewish believers whom we can also call The Nation of Israel.

For gentle believers it is a little unclear to me since they were never under Jewish law.
This brings us to "grafting". onto the "olive root" and what that entails.

I Have always said we need to look at context.
Luke 17:14 Jesus says “Go and show yourselves to the priests.” When men were made clean. Are Christians commanded to do that today if cleansed of leprosy? I don't think so because that is Jewish Law. Does not apply to gentiles. Grafting is about faith in Jesus. Not Literal laws. And we must remember that everything Jesus said in the Gospels was in the context of speaking to Jews not gentiles.

 

[Leaf473]

OK, lets keep it general.
First, Did Christ at the Cross change ANY Jewish laws?

It seems most agree that "ceremonial" laws were changed for Christian Jewish believers whom we can also call The Nation of Israel.

For gentle believers it is a little unclear to me since they were never under Jewish law.
This brings us to "grafting". onto the "olive root" and what that entails.

I Have always said we need to look at context.
Luke 17:14 Jesus says “Go and show yourselves to the priests.” When men were made clean. Are Christians commanded to do that today if cleansed of leprosy? I don't think so because that is Jewish Law. Does not apply to gentiles. Grafting is about faith in Jesus. Not Literal laws. And we must remember that everything Jesus said in the Gospels was in the context of speaking to Jews not gentiles.

That's a good point about Go and show yourself to the priest. If we follow all of Jesus' teaching pre-cross, we would have to do that law, too.

Indeed, Jesus says something about These you ought to have done without neglecting the others, meaning keep the entire law.

 

[expos4ever]

The law is holy, and the commandment is righteous and good...Romans 7:12 19

Again, this is true, but it is not the whole story - it is clear that Paul believes that the law is both "holy" and that it serves a "darker" purpose:

But there are other indications in the same chapter that settle the matter. We have this:

For when we were controlled by the sinful nature, the sinful passions aroused by the Law were at work in our bodies……”

This makes things more clear. The Torah actually stimulates sinful passions – it arouses them. It does not merely reveal them.

And there’s more:

For sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, deceived me, and through the commandment put me to death

Again, Paul says that the Torah gave sin a means, a vehicle to deceive. This is not a statement that Torah reveals sin – it is the stronger claim that Torah empowers or energizes sin – gives it powers it would not otherwise have.

Paul really does hammer the point home. I do not see how one take Paul seriously and yet deny that he (Paul) is claiming that the Torah makes Israel more sinful, over and above the role of Torah in revealing sin.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

That's a good point about Go and show yourself to the priest. If we follow all of Jesus' teaching pre-cross, we would have to do that law, too.

Indeed, Jesus says something about These you ought to have done without neglecting the others, meaning keep the entire law.

Also
Matthew 23:3
1 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.

Are believers still under the authority of Pharisees?

 

[expos4ever]

This brings us to "grafting". onto the "olive root" and what that entails.

Note that if the law in its entirety is retired, as I believe is the case, this enables the Jew and Gentile to be branches in the same olive tree (before, the Gentile was on the outside, of course).

 

[pescador]

Also
Matthew 23:3
1 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.

Are believers still under the authority of Pharisees?

Of course not. Don't forget to whom Jesus was speaking -- Jews. There were no Christians at the time.