Did Christ at the cross end all the laws?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
8,127
2,191
54
Northeast
✟177,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Protestant here, I'm not 100% sure what the EO and RC stance on Tradition is, but I think we can both agree that they sometimes seem to hold their traditions to the same level as Scripture, which is wrong, but that doesn't mean we should reject Tradition or* the Church Fathers.

To put it shortly, Scripture is magisterial and Tradition is ministerial. Scripture has ultimate importance as it is the Word of God, but Tradition is very useful when it is based upon Scripture.

This is why Creeds and Confessions are so important, they are not Scripture but they do accurately summarize Scripture and the basic doctrines of Christianity that are taught in Scripture.

I'm not sure if Aquila would agree with me here, and sorry to both of you for just randomly joining this conversation:sweatsmile:
Hi Ndjt,

Welcome to CF!
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Nj_
Upvote 0

expos4ever

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2008
10,592
5,732
Montreal, Quebec
✟248,004.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Sin is defined in the scriptures as the transgression of God's law *1 John 3:4 or breaking anyone of Gods 10 commandments (James 2:10-11) or not believing Gods' Word (Romans 14:23).
No.

Again, we need to respect what the writers actually say, and you are not doing that with respect to 1 John 3:4. For the umpteenth time, I John 3:4 does not mention the Law of Moses, it refers to lawlessness in general.

You guys systematically take it upon yourselves to rewrite this as lawlessness entails breaking the 10 commandments in particular.

This is eisegesis - reading something into the text that is not there.

I am a Canadian. I do not practice lawlessness - I obey Canadian law. The fact that I do not obey a particular other law - American law for example - does not mean I practice lawlessness. Likewise, someone who follows some law other than the Law of Moses is not practicing lawlessness.

I will address your take on Romans 2:14-16 and James in another post.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
10,021
4,233
USA
✟470,520.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I just want to note that I think one could reasonably say that the Church has
engaged in "binding and loosing" of the ten commandments. Also the rest of the law, e.g. laws about usury.
No “man” has the authority to change, delete, alter the commandments of God. Proverbs 30:5-6 There is no scripture in the entire bible that says the Ten Commandments ended, but we have God writing His laws in our hearts and minds to New Covenant believers. Hebrews 8:10, Jeremiah 31:33 and every one of the Ten Commandments repeated in the New Covenant for every day Christian living. That’s why its best to go by scripture instead of our thoughts and feelings. Proverbs 3:5-6
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Akita Suggagaki

Well-Known Member
Jul 20, 2018
6,722
4,890
69
Midwest
✟278,898.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
10,021
4,233
USA
✟470,520.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
If Torah is still in effect in spite of Christ at the cross we hve a lot to catch up on.

A List of the 613 Mitzvot (Commandments) - Judaism 101 (JewFAQ)

Though I do have a mezuzah on my doorpost (21) I do not have tefillin not tzitzit (19 &20).

The only law that ended is the law of ordinances in the law of Moses- not the commandments of God. Colossians 2:14 This has been explained a few times, and we should always seek scriptures for God’s Truth. Seek and ye shall find and the Truth shall set you free. John 8:32 We are called to worship in Truth and Spirit. John 4:24 God bless.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Nj_
Upvote 0

Nj_

Active Member
Apr 20, 2022
55
32
Minnesota
✟20,194.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Single
Fathers who disagree with the authority of the Seat of Peter are as mistaken as anyone else who refuse Peter's Christ appointed authority. But the fact that they commented upon it illustrates the notion's prevalence from the earliest days of the Church. :oldthumbsup:
Again, you're agreeing that the same Church Fathers that you claim are a part of your Romanist Tradition actually opposed your Theology, you're essentially agreeing with me that your Tradition goes against... well your Tradition.

This is the 2nd Canon of the First Council of Constantinople that you also claim to have been created by your Church yet goes against your Papist interpretation, are you also going to say that the COuncil that you claim to have created is mistaken because it goes against another doctrine that you created later?

"The bishops are not to go beyond their dioceses to churches lying outside of their bounds, nor bring confusion on the churches; but let the Bishop of Alexandria, according to the canons, alone administer the affairs of Egypt; and let the bishops of the East manage the East alone, the privileges of the Church in Antioch, which are mentioned in the canons of Nice, being preserved; and let the bishops of the Asian Diocese administer the Asian affairs only; and the Pontic bishops only Pontic matters; and the Thracian bishops only Thracian affairs. And let not bishops go beyond their dioceses for ordination or any other ecclesiastical ministrations, unless they be invited. And the aforesaid canon concerning dioceses being observed, it is evident that the synod of every province will administer the affairs of that particular province as was decreed at Nice. But the Churches of God in heathen nations must be governed according to the custom which has prevailed from the times of the Fathers."
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.