Did Jesus set the law aside at the Bethesda pool?

[Saint Steven]

The phrase "the Law and the Prophets" is inclusive of everything contained in the Law and the Prophets and depending on the context the phrase "the law" can refer specifically to the law contained in that body of works. However, "the law" often does not refer to that, so I use "God's Law", "the Mosaic Law", of "the Law" to specifically refer to that.

There is more to the Law than the law itself. Much more.
But how do you define these terms?

What is the difference between "the Mosaic Law" and "the Law"?
What is the difference between "God's Law" and "the Law"?

What is the difference between "the Mosaic Law" and "the Law of Moses"?
What is the difference between "the Mosaic Law" and "God's Law"?
What is the difference between "the Pentateuch" and "the Law of Moses"? ​

What is the difference between "the Law" and "the law"? (Romans 3:21)

The verse in Luke explains the verse in Matthew. The books of the Law and the Books of the Prophets. (and the book of Psalms)

Matthew 5:17
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Luke 24:44
He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”

 

[Soyeong]

There is more to the Law than the law itself. Much more.
But how do you define these terms?

What is the difference between "the Mosaic Law" and "the Law"?
What is the difference between "God's Law" and "the Law"?

What is the difference between "the Mosaic Law" and "the Law of Moses"?
What is the difference between "the Mosaic Law" and "God's Law"?
What is the difference between "the Pentateuch" and "the Law of Moses"? ​

What is the difference between "the Law" and "the law"? (Romans 3:21)

"The Mosaic Law", "the Law", and "God's Law" refers to the law that is found in the books of Moses or the Pentateuch. Romans 3:21 is simply referring to the laws found in the Law and the Prophets.

The verse in Luke explains the verse in Matthew. The books of the Law and the Books of the Prophets. (and the book of Psalms)

Matthew 5:17
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Luke 24:44
He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”

I apologize, I should have listed the full definition of "pleroo":

1. to fulfil, i.e. to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be, and God's promises (given through the prophets) to receive fulfilment

So when it it is in regard to the Law, it is about obeying the law as it should be, and in Matthew 5, Jesus was speaking in regard to how the Law should be obeyed, not regard to the fulfillment of prophecies or in regard to his death on the cross. In Luke 24:44, Jesus was speaking more about causing God's promises given through the prophets to receive their fulfilment.

 

[Saint Steven]

"The Mosaic Law", "the Law", and "God's Law" refers to the law that is found in the books of Moses or the Pentateuch. Romans 3:21 is simply referring to the laws found in the Law and the Prophets. …

With those definitions in mind, how do you process this? Here we have "the law", "God’s law", and "Christ’s law", all different things.

1 Corinthians 9:21
To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Furthermore, this says now "the righteousness of God has been made known" which is "apart from the law". How can you sweep that aside?

Romans 3:21
But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify.

 

[Soyeong]

With those definitions in mind, how do you process this? Here we have "the law", "God’s law", and "Christ’s law", all different things.

1 Corinthians 9:21
To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Unless you think that Jesus or the Spirit were in disagreement with the Father about which laws we should follow, then you should think that the Law of Christ is the same as the Law of the Spirit, which is the same as the Law of the Father, which was given to Moses. In 1 Corinthians 9:21, Paul said that he was not free from God's Law in a parallel statement to being under Christ's Law, so they are both referring to the same thing.

The issue of those not having the law refers to not having physical possession of it. The Torah scrolls belonged to the Jews and they were in charge copying it. They were rare and costly to make, so if a Gentile wanted to learn how to obey the Torah, then they had to be taught by the Jews, which means that if you have a copy of it, then you also have the law. However, Paul was not speaking about sinning in order to reach sinners because that would have completely undermined his message to to them, but rather in context he was speaking about giving up his rights in order to meet people where they were at.

Furthermore, this says now "the righteousness of God has been made known" which is "apart from the law". How can you sweep that aside?

Romans 3:21
But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify.

In Romans 3:21-22, Paul said that the Law and the Prophets testified that the righteousness of God is through faith in Christ for all who believe, so it is something that has always been there, but was now being manifested. So the one and only way that there has ever been to become righteous is by grace through faith, but that had been obscured through a misunderstanding of the goal of the Law.

In Romans 9:30-10:4, the Israelites had a zeal for God, but it was not based on knowledge because they didn't understand that the righteousness of God comes only through faith in Christ, so they failed to obtain righteousness because they pursued the Law as through righteousness were by works in an effort to establish their own instead of by pursuing the law as through righteousness were by faith, for Christ is the goal of the Law for everyone who has faith.

So righteousness has been manifested apart from the Law because the Law does not play a role in causing us to become righteous. However, when we are made righteous through faith in Christ, then we will express that character trait through our actions in obedience to God's instructions for how to express His righteousness found in His Law. So the Law was never given as instructions for how to become righteous, but as instructions for how those who have been made righteous should therefore act.

 

[Saint Steven]

Unless you think that Jesus or the Spirit were in disagreement with the Father about which laws we should follow, then you should think that the Law of Christ is the same as the Law of the Spirit, which is the same as the Law of the Father, which was given to Moses. In 1 Corinthians 9:21, Paul said that he was not free from God's Law in a parallel statement to being under Christ's Law, so they are both referring to the same thing. …

This gets back to my definition of these things. As I understand it, "God's law" goes back to the beginning. It is the law of human conscience that God gave to all of us. When Moses came on the scene God gave laws to the Israelites through Moses. That law I call "the law". When Jesus came he had his own commands which I would call "Christ's law". They are all different laws. But there is obviously some crossover. Now that we are under grace and the Spirit was outpoured at Pentecost we are to be led by the Spirit. We should be aware of the law, but we are not under it.

1 Corinthians 9:21
To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law.

 

[Saint Steven]

…
The issue of those not having the law refers to not having physical possession of it. The Torah scrolls belonged to the Jews and they were in charge copying it. They were rare and costly to make, so if a Gentile wanted to learn how to obey the Torah, then they had to be taught by the Jews, which means that if you have a copy of it, then you also have the law. However, Paul was not speaking about sinning in order to reach sinners because that would have completely undermined his message to to them, but rather in context he was speaking about giving up his rights in order to meet people where they were at. …

Well if that was the case then no one except the synagogue rulers and the very rich had the law. That is obviously not what the Apostle was talking about. Unless he had a ministry to the elite. Not likely.

 

[Saint Steven]

… So the Law was never given as instructions for how to become righteous, but as instructions for how those who have been made righteous should therefore act.

That's sounds like double talk to me. Can you clarify?

 

[Saint Steven]

Unless you think that Jesus or the Spirit were in disagreement with the Father about which laws we should follow, then you should think that the Law of Christ is the same as the Law of the Spirit, which is the same as the Law of the Father, which was given to Moses. …

It's not about a disagreement. Different laws are for different times, peoples and situations. Remember my question about orange juice? The law about not partaking from the tree in the middle of the garden no longer applies. Do you question that it was a law, or command of God? In the same way the law that God gave to the Israelites alone through Moses has never applied to gentiles. And does not apply to believers in Christ.

Romans 6:14
For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace.