God Disqualified Christians From Participating in the Mosaic Law Covenant

[Doran]

Hi, Folks

I have created a few biblical syllogisms that show that the Old Covenant, having been set aside, made obsolete and made to vanish forever in 70 A.D. was ordained for this destiny because it was antithetical to the eternal eternal the New Covenant that supersedes it. Eventually, I'll post all three syllogisms in this thread. But in the syllogism below, I approach the Mosaic Law from a different angle --from the perspective of 1Tim 1:8 that makes the Mosaic Law good on the condition that one uses it lawfully.

For anyone who is unfamiliar with the syllogistic method to making logical conclusions, a syllogism consists of a major premise and any number minor premises that are closely related to each other, and then finally to the grand finale, as it were -- the logical conclusion itself. In order to falsify a syllogism one would need to invalidate at least one of the premises in the chain of premises. The following syllogism consists of one major premise and 10 minor ones. I have named this one:

The Unlawful Use of the Law of Moses​

The Mosaic Law is good if it's used lawfully (1Tim 1:8)

The Mosaic Law was made for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners and for the unholy and profane such as described in 1Tim 1:9-11; 1Cor 6:9-11; Rom 1:21-32; Gal 5:19-21; Col 3:5-9; 2Pet 2:10-22; Mk 7:21-23; Rev 22:15, etc.;

And Israel's transgressions are the quintessential example of why God added the Law Covenant(Gal 3:19);

Conversely, all God's elect are considered by God to be righteous in his sight and no longer subject to the Mosaic Law Covenant (1Tim 1:9)

And righteousness is defined in various ways in the NT to mean, among other things, "to be washed" (1Cor 6:11), and this washing was through the new birth" (Tit 3:5); and it also means to be washed through the blood of the Lamb (Rev 7:14).

Additionally, righteousness is also defined as being sanctified (1Cor 6:11); and this means to be sanctified by faith (Act 26:18); to be in Christ (1Cor 1:30; Heb 2:11), and to be sanctified by the Spirit (1Pet 1:2);

Also, righteousness is defined as God justifying the ungodly by imputing Christ's righteousness to all his elect (Rom 8:30), and Christ himself justifies the elect (Isa 53:11) by his own shed blood (Rom 5:9); and we're justified solely by faith (Act 13:39; Gal 2:16; 3:11), which is actually contrary to the Mosiac Law (Gal 3:12).

This does not mean that we're not under any Law in this NC era , even though Christ is the end of the Law for all believers (Rom 10:4); for we are under a different law the Law of Christ (Isa 42:4, 21, 24; 1Cor 9:21; Gal 6:2; 2Jn 9), which also goes by other names, e.g.the Law of Liberty (Jas 1:25: 2:12); Perfect Law (Jas 2:12); The Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ (Rom 8:2) and the Law of Faith (Rom 3:27);

But what these truths do imply is that in this New Covenant age, the Law of Christ, by any of its names, is antithetical to the Mosaic Law Covenant, since it is the Gospel and the Law of Christ that determine what is lawful and what is not in this age, for God commands his NC people to listen to His son (Deut 18:15; Mat 17:5; Heb 1:1-2), as did Christ himself command (Mat 28:20; Jn 16:12-14);

And these truths also imply that the Law of Moses and the Law of Christ cannot possibly be one and the same Law, otherwise no Christian would be under any law whatsoever, which would result in the apostle Paul contradicting himself twice over (1Cor 9:21; Gal 6:2), also contradicting Peter (1 Pet 1:2) and contradicting Christ himself (Lk 6:47; Mat 28:20).

And the Law of Liberty (Jas 1:25) cannot be one and the same as the Mosaic Law, for the former is truth which sets us free from the law of sin and death (Rom 8:2; Jn 8:32), while the later can only enslave us to sin, for it is the power of sin (1Cor 15:56) since it arouses sinful passions in us (Rom 7:5).

Therefore, because all true believers are righteous in God's eyes, having been washed, sanctified and justified by God through Christ and by the Holy Spirit, it is UNLAWFUL, according to the Law of Christ, for any Christian to place him or herself under the Mosaic Law Covenant that was set aside (Heb 10:9), became obsolete and disappeared forever in 70 A.D. (Heb 8:13) for any reason; and it is equally unlawful for any professing Christian to attempt to bind the conscience of another believer or truth-seeker by persuading them that the Mosaic Law Covenant either sanctifies them through their obedience or that the Old Covenant is still the primary Rule of Conduct for Living in this New Covenant dispensation. Paul pronounced a curse (twice over!) on those who wanted to exalt the Mosaic Law over Gospel Truth, thereby perverting it (Gal 1:6-9)! And Christ himself pronounced a "woe" on all who would cause one of his own to stumble (Lk 17:1-2). This is how serious an error Legalism is. There are indeed lawful uses for the Mosaic Law but none of them are what I have just stated in this paragraph.

 

[BobRyan]

Hi, Folks

I have created a few biblical syllogisms that show that the Old Covenant, having been set aside, made obsolete and made to vanish forever in 70 A.D.

I did not find even one text in your list that said the Old Covenant ended in 70 AD.

The Unlawful Use of the Law of Moses​

The Mosaic Law is good if it's used lawfully (1Tim 1:8)

Jesus uses the Law of Moses - lawfully in Mark 7:6-13 and in Matt 19:16-19

Mark 7:6-13
And in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’
8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘The one who speaks evil of father or mother, is certainly to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a person says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is, given to God),’ 12 you no longer allow him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thereby invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”

Matt 19:16 And someone came to Him and said, “Teacher, what good thing shall I do so that I may obtain eternal life?” 17 And He said to him, “Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you want to enter life, keep the commandments.” 18 Then he *said to Him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, “You shall not commit murder (Ex 20); You shall not commit adultery(Ex 20); You shall not steal (Ex 20);You shall not give false testimony(Ex 20); 19 Honor your father and mother(Ex 20); and You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (Lev 19:18)'

All of that - straight from the Law of Moses

JUST as we see in James 2 and Rom 13 and Eph 6:1-2 and Romans 7

The Mosaic Law was made for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners

And Rom 3:19-20 says this is why all the world and EVERY Mouth is condemned to that very day.

19 Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; 20 because by the works of the Law none of mankind will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes knowledge of sin.'

No exceptions.. for as Rom 3:23 says "ALL have sinned"

Conversely, all God's elect are considered by God to be righteous in his sight

All born again saints in OT and in NT are released from the Old Covenant of Rom 3:19-20 "obey and live" for they are saved by grace through faith. This explains how it is that Moses AND Elijah stand in glory WITH CHRIST in Matt 17 on the mount of transfiguration.

Gal 1:6-9 only ONE Gospel
Gal 3:8 that ONE Gospel was preached to Abraham

So then to this very day it is STILL a sin (even for Christians) to "Take God's name in vain" Ex 20:7

 

[Soyeong]

Hi, Folks

I have created a few biblical syllogisms that show that the Old Covenant, having been set aside, made obsolete and made to vanish forever in 70 A.D. was ordained for this destiny because it was antithetical to to the eternal eternal the New Covenant that supersedes it. Eventually, I'll post all three syllogisms in this thread. But in the syllogism below, I approach the Mosaic Law from a different angle --from the perspective of 1Tim 1:8 that makes the Mosaic Law good on the condition that one uses it lawfully.

For anyone who is unfamiliar with the syllogistic method to making logical conclusions, a syllogism consists of a major premise and any number minor premises that are closely related to each other, and then finally to the grand finale, as it were -- the logical conclusion itself. In order to falsify a syllogism one would need to invalidate at least one of the premises in the chain of premises. The following syllogism consists of one major premise and 10 minor ones. I have named this one:

The Unlawful Use of the Law of Moses​

The Mosaic Law is good if it's used lawfully (1Tim 1:8)

The Mosaic Law was made for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners and for the unholy and profane such as described in 1Tim 1:9-11; 1Cor 6:9-11; Rom 1:21-32; Gal 5:19-21; Col 3:5-9; 2Pet 2:10-22; Mk 7:21-23; Rev 22:15, etc.;

Conversely, all God's elect are considered by God to be righteous in his sight and no longer subject to the Mosaic Law Covenant (1Tim 1:9)

In 1 John 3:7, whoever practices righteousness is righteous even as they are righteous, so instructions for how to practice righteousness are not made to teach the righteous because the righteous are already following them, but rather it is the unrighteous who need to be taught those instructions. If someone says that the Mosaic Law is only for the lawless and disobedience in order to justify their freedom to be lawless and disobedient, then they thereby become someone that the Mosaic Law is made for.

And Israel's transgressions are the quintessential example of why God added the Law Covenant(Gal 3:19);

We should use Israel's disobedience to the Mosaic Law as an example for us to avoid (1 Corinthians 10:1-13), not as an example for us to emulate.

And righteousness is defined in various ways in the NT to mean, among other things, "to be washed" (1Cor 6:11), and this washing was through the new birth" (Tit 3:5); and it also means to be washed through the blood of the Lamb (Rev 7:14).

The only way to become someone who has a character trait is through faith that we ought to become someone who practices it apart from being required to have practiced it a certain amount first as though it could be earned as a wage. To become someone who has a character trait means to become someone who practices that trait and it is contradictory to become someone who has a character trait apart from becoming someone who practices it.

So the only way for someone who is courageous is through faith that they ought to become someone who practices courageousness apart from being required to have practiced it a certain amount first as through it could be earned as a wage. To become courageous means to become someone who practices courageousness and it is contradictory for to become someone who is courageous apart from becoming someone who practices courageousness.

The same is true of any other character trait, including righteousness. The Mosaic Law is God's instructions for how to practice righteousness, not for how to become someone who is righteous. For example, the Mosaic Law reveals that helping the poor is a way to practice righteousness, but no amount of helping the poor will ever cause someone to become righteous because the only way to become righteous is through faith. So when God declares us to be righteous through faith that means that He is declaring us to be someone who practices righteousness by the same faith. In Isaiah 51:7, the righteous are those on whose heart is the Mosaic Law.

Additionally, righteousness is also defined as being sanctified (1Cor 6:11); and this means to be sanctified by faith (Act 26:18); to be in Christ (1Cor 1:30; Heb 2:11), and to be sanctified by the Spirit (1Pet 1:2);

The Spirit has the role of leading us to obey the Mosaic Law (Ezekiel 36:26-27) and that is we are sanctified by the Spirit.

Also, righteousness is defined as God justifying the ungodly by imputing Christ's righteousness to all his elect (Rom 8:30), and Christ himself justifies the elect (Isa 53:11) by his own shed blood (Rom 5:9); and we're justified solely by faith (Act 13:39; Gal 2:16; 3:11), which is actually contrary to the Mosiac Law (Gal 3:12).

Christ express his righteousness by walking in obedience to the Mosaic Law, so that is also the way that we live when we are imputed with his righteousness. God is trustworthy, therefore the Mosaic Law is also trustworthy (Psalms 19:7), so the way to trust God is by obediently trusting in the Mosaic Law, it is contradictory to think that God is trustworthy, but not what He has instructed, and say that what God has instructed is not of faith is to deny the faithfulness of God. When someone helps the poor in obedience to the Mosaic Law, the significance of their action is not that they are trying to earn their righteousness as a wage, but that they are expressing faith in God to guide them in how to rightly live, and it is by that faith that we are declared righteous.

This does not mean that we're not under any Law in this NC era ,

In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant still involves following the Mosaic Law.

even though Christ is the end of the Law for all believers (Rom 10:4);

In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him to walk in His way that he might know Him and Israel too, and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because

for we are under a different law the Law of Christ (Isa 42:4, 21, 24; 1Cor 9:21; Gal 6:2; 2Jn 9),

God is not in disagreement with Himself about which laws we should follow, so the Law of Christ is the same as the Law of the Spirit and the Law of the Father, which was given to Moses. Christ set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Mosaic Law, so it is absurd to think that the Law of Christ is something other than or contrary to what Christ practiced.

which also goes by other names, e.g.the Law of Liberty (Jas 1:25: 2:12); Perfect Law (Jas 2:12);

The Mosaic Law is perfect (Psalms 19:7), it is a law of liberty (Psalms 119:45), and it blesses those who obey it (Psalms 119:1-3), so when James 1:25 speaks about the perfect law of liberty that blesses those who obey it, he was not saying anything about the Mosaic Law that wasn't already said in the Psalms.

The Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ (Rom 8:2) and the Law of Faith (Rom 3:27);

In Romans 7:25-8:2 Paul equated the Law of Moses with the Law of the Spirit of life by contrasting them both with the law of sin and death. After all, the Mosaic Law was given by God and the Spirit is God. In Romans 3:31, our faith upholds the Mosaic Law, and in Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that faith is one of the weightier matters of the Mosaic Law, so it is the law of faith.

But what these truths do imply is that in this New Covenant age, the Law of Christ, by any of its names, is antithetical to the Mosaic Law Covenant, since it is the Gospel and the Law of Christ that determine what is lawful and what is not in this age, for God commands his NC people to listen to His son (Deut 18:15; Mat 17:5; Heb 1:1-2), as did Christ himself command (28:20; Jn 16:12-14);

In Matthew 4:15-23, Christ began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Mosaic Law is how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message.

And these truths also imply that the Law of Moses and the Law of Christ cannot possibly be the one and same Law, otherwise no Christian would be under any law whatsoever, which would result in the apostle Paul contradicting himself twice over (1Cor 9:21; Gal 6:2), also contradicting Peter (1:2) and contradicting Christ himself (Lk 6:47; Mat 28:20).

In Psalms 119:142, the Mosaic Law is truth, which means that your post is opposed to truth. In 1 Corinthian 9:21, Paul used a parallel statement to equate the Law of Christ with the Law of Moses. Jesus spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Mosaic Law by word and by example, so that does not contradict the verses you cited.

And the Law of Liberty (Jas 1:25) cannot be one and the same as the Mosaic Law, for the former is truth which sets us free from the law of sin and death (Rom 8:2; Jn 8:32), while the later can only enslave us to sin, for it is the power of sin (1Cor 15:56) since it arouses sinful passions in us (Rom 7:5).

Again, in Psalms 119:142, the Mosaic Law is truth, and in John 8:31-36, it is sin in transgression of the Mosaic Law that puts us in bondage while it is the truth that sets us free. In Romans 7:25-8:2, Paul contrasted the law of sin and death with the Law of Moses. It is the law of sin and death that is the power of sin and that stirs up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death, not the Law of Moses.

Therefore, because all true believers are righteous in God's eyes, having been washed, sanctified and justified by God through Christ and by the Holy Spirit, it is UNLAWFUL, according to the Law of Christ, for any Christian to place him or herself under the Mosaic Law Covenant that was set aside (Heb 10:9), became obsolete and disappeared forever in 70 A.D. (Heb 8:13) for any reason; and it is equally unlawful for any professing Christian to attempt to bind the conscience of another believer or truth-seeker by persuading them that the Mosaic Law Covenant either sanctifies them through their obedience or that the Old Covenant is still the primary Rule of Conduct for Living in this New Covenant dispensation. Paul pronounced a curse (twice over!) on those who wanted to exalt the Mosaic Law over Gospel Truth, thereby perverting it (Gal 1:6-9)! And Christ himself pronounced a "woe" on all who would cause one of his own to stumble (Lk 17:1-2). This is how serious an error Legalism is. There are indeed lawful uses for the Mosaic Law but none of them are what I have just stated in this paragraph.

In John 17:7, it says to sanctify them in truth and that God's word is truth. The Mosaic Law is God's word and you are arguing against following God's word.

The Mosaic Covenant is eternal (Exodus 31:14-17, Leviticus 24:8), so the only way that it can be replaced by the New Covenant is if the New Covenant does everything that the Mosaic Covenant does plus more, which is what it means to make someone obsolete (Hebrews 8:13). This is why the New Covenant still involves following the Mosaic Law (Hebrews 8:10) plus it is based on better promises and has a superior mediator (Hebrews 8:6).

In Romans 15:4, Paul said that OT Scripture was written for our instruction, and in 15:18-19, he fulfilled the Gospel by bringing Gentiles to obedience in word and in deed, so you should not trying to use Galatians 1:6-9 as a weapon against the Gospel that Jesus and Paul taught. You should take your own advise against causing others to stumble and you should should be quicker to think that you have misunderstood all of the verses that you have cited than to think that it makes sense to interpret the Bible as speaking against obeying what God has commanded.

 

[GDL]

the Old Covenant, having been set aside, made obsolete and made to vanish forever in 70 A.D. was ordained for this destiny because it was antithetical to the eternal eternal the New Covenant that supersedes it

I did not find even one text in your list that said the Old Covenant ended in 70 AD.

Do you think the Mosaic Covenant is still in effect?

• If you think it is no longer in effect, when do you think it ended?
• If it has ended, then does it make any of the points of the argument incorrect?

Do you agree that:

• When God said he would make a New Covenant, God had thereby made the first (Mosaic per Heb8:9) Covenant obsolete (Heb8:13a)?
• That when Hebrews was written, the first (Mosaic) Covenant was being made obsolete and growing old (Heb8:13b)?
• That the first (Mosaic) Covenant was near/close to destruction/disappearing (Heb8:13c)?
  • What do you think "near/close to" refers to timewise?

Was the New Covenant ratified/inaugurated/dedicated in the blood of Jesus Christ (Matt26; Mark14; Luke22; 1Cor11; Heb9-10; Heb12-13)?
Do you agree that history informs us that Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed, and the Jews were scattered in AD70?

Do you agree that Jesus foretold this destruction (Matt24; Mark13; Luke19: Luke21)?

Jesus uses the Law of Moses - lawfully in Mark 7:6-13 and in Matt 19:16-19

Mark 7:6-13
And in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’
8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘The one who speaks evil of father or mother, is certainly to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a person says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is, given to God),’ 12 you no longer allow him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thereby invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”

Matt 19:16 And someone came to Him and said, “Teacher, what good thing shall I do so that I may obtain eternal life?” 17 And He said to him, “Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you want to enter life, keep the commandments.” 18 Then he *said to Him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, “You shall not commit murder (Ex 20); You shall not commit adultery(Ex 20); You shall not steal (Ex 20);You shall not give false testimony(Ex 20); 19 Honor your father and mother(Ex 20); and You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (Lev 19:18)'

All of that - straight from the Law of Moses

JUST as we see in James 2 and Rom 13 and Eph 6:1-2 and Romans 7

Are these points being made to agree or disagree with any points in the Argument?

Should 2Tim3:16-17 be referenced to support or disprove the Argument or whatever your point is?

And Rom 3:19-20 says this is why all the world and EVERY Mouth is condemned to that very day.

19 Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; 20 because by the works of the Law none of mankind will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes knowledge of sin.'

No exceptions.. for as Rom 3:23 says "ALL have sinned"

Again, are you supporting or refuting any point in the Argument?

All born again saints in OT and in NT are released from the Old Covenant of Rom 3:19-20 "obey and live" for they are saved by grace through faith. This explains how it is that Moses AND Elijah stand in glory WITH CHRIST in Matt 17 on the mount of transfiguration.

Gal 1:6-9 only ONE Gospel
Gal 3:8 that ONE Gospel was preached to Abraham

So then to this very day it is STILL a sin (even for Christians) to "Take God's name in vain" Ex 20:7

Same question.

 

[GDL]

In 1 John 3:7, whoever practices righteousness is righteous even as they are He is righteous, so instructions for how to practice righteousness are not made to teach the righteous because the righteous are already following them, but rather it is the unrighteous who need to be taught those instructions. If someone says that the Mosaic Law is only for the lawless and disobedience in order to justify their freedom to be lawless and disobedient, then they thereby become someone that the Mosaic Law is made for.

1John3:7 does not refute 2Tim3:16-17.

As yet, I've seen no point in the Argument that refutes 2Tim3:16-17.

We should use Israel's disobedience to the Mosaic Law as an example for us to avoid (1 Corinthians 10:1-13), not as an example for us to emulate.

Is this an argument to agree or disagree with the quoted point in the Argument?

I see no point in the Argument suggesting a Christian is to emulate sin.


Lengthy Argument. Lengthy response. I'll not be writing lengthy, unless I do.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Hi, Folks

I have created a few biblical syllogisms that show that the Old Covenant, having been set aside, made obsolete and made to vanish forever in 70 A.D. was ordained for this destiny because it was antithetical to the eternal eternal the New Covenant that supersedes it. Eventually, I'll post all three syllogisms in this thread. But in the syllogism below, I approach the Mosaic Law from a different angle --from the perspective of 1Tim 1:8 that makes the Mosaic Law good on the condition that one uses it lawfully.

For anyone who is unfamiliar with the syllogistic method to making logical conclusions, a syllogism consists of a major premise and any number minor premises that are closely related to each other, and then finally to the grand finale, as it were -- the logical conclusion itself. In order to falsify a syllogism one would need to invalidate at least one of the premises in the chain of premises. The following syllogism consists of one major premise and 10 minor ones. I have named this one:

The Unlawful Use of the Law of Moses​

The Mosaic Law is good if it's used lawfully (1Tim 1:8)

The Mosaic Law was made for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners and for the unholy and profane such as described in 1Tim 1:9-11; 1Cor 6:9-11; Rom 1:21-32; Gal 5:19-21; Col 3:5-9; 2Pet 2:10-22; Mk 7:21-23; Rev 22:15, etc.;

And Israel's transgressions are the quintessential example of why God added the Law Covenant(Gal 3:19);

Conversely, all God's elect are considered by God to be righteous in his sight and no longer subject to the Mosaic Law Covenant (1Tim 1:9)

And righteousness is defined in various ways in the NT to mean, among other things, "to be washed" (1Cor 6:11), and this washing was through the new birth" (Tit 3:5); and it also means to be washed through the blood of the Lamb (Rev 7:14).

Additionally, righteousness is also defined as being sanctified (1Cor 6:11); and this means to be sanctified by faith (Act 26:18); to be in Christ (1Cor 1:30; Heb 2:11), and to be sanctified by the Spirit (1Pet 1:2);

Also, righteousness is defined as God justifying the ungodly by imputing Christ's righteousness to all his elect (Rom 8:30), and Christ himself justifies the elect (Isa 53:11) by his own shed blood (Rom 5:9); and we're justified solely by faith (Act 13:39; Gal 2:16; 3:11), which is actually contrary to the Mosiac Law (Gal 3:12).

This does not mean that we're not under any Law in this NC era , even though Christ is the end of the Law for all believers (Rom 10:4); for we are under a different law the Law of Christ (Isa 42:4, 21, 24; 1Cor 9:21; Gal 6:2; 2Jn 9), which also goes by other names, e.g.the Law of Liberty (Jas 1:25: 2:12); Perfect Law (Jas 2:12); The Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ (Rom 8:2) and the Law of Faith (Rom 3:27);

But what these truths do imply is that in this New Covenant age, the Law of Christ, by any of its names, is antithetical to the Mosaic Law Covenant, since it is the Gospel and the Law of Christ that determine what is lawful and what is not in this age, for God commands his NC people to listen to His son (Deut 18:15; Mat 17:5; Heb 1:1-2), as did Christ himself command (Mat 28:20; Jn 16:12-14);

And these truths also imply that the Law of Moses and the Law of Christ cannot possibly be one and the same Law, otherwise no Christian would be under any law whatsoever, which would result in the apostle Paul contradicting himself twice over (1Cor 9:21; Gal 6:2), also contradicting Peter (1 Pet 1:2) and contradicting Christ himself (Lk 6:47; Mat 28:20).

And the Law of Liberty (Jas 1:25) cannot be one and the same as the Mosaic Law, for the former is truth which sets us free from the law of sin and death (Rom 8:2; Jn 8:32), while the later can only enslave us to sin, for it is the power of sin (1Cor 15:56) since it arouses sinful passions in us (Rom 7:5).

Therefore, because all true believers are righteous in God's eyes, having been washed, sanctified and justified by God through Christ and by the Holy Spirit, it is UNLAWFUL, according to the Law of Christ, for any Christian to place him or herself under the Mosaic Law Covenant that was set aside (Heb 10:9), became obsolete and disappeared forever in 70 A.D. (Heb 8:13) for any reason; and it is equally unlawful for any professing Christian to attempt to bind the conscience of another believer or truth-seeker by persuading them that the Mosaic Law Covenant either sanctifies them through their obedience or that the Old Covenant is still the primary Rule of Conduct for Living in this New Covenant dispensation. Paul pronounced a curse (twice over!) on those who wanted to exalt the Mosaic Law over Gospel Truth, thereby perverting it (Gal 1:6-9)! And Christ himself pronounced a "woe" on all who would cause one of his own to stumble (Lk 17:1-2). This is how serious an error Legalism is. There are indeed lawful uses for the Mosaic Law but none of them are what I have just stated in this paragraph.

I guess this would include Jesus who is disqualified, since He taught often on the law of Moses i.e. greatest commandments and many other principles directly from the law of Moses as well as from the Ten Commandments. In most of the verses you quote it just says "law" and you are adding "Mosasic covenant" I would consider not doing that per the instructions of scripture Pro 30:5-6 and allow the scripture to interpret itself.

 

[Soyeong]

1John3:7 does not refute 2Tim3:16-17.

As yet, I've seen no point in the Argument that refutes 2Tim3:16-17.

I have made no argument that refutes 2 Timothy 3:16-17 primarily because I have no desire to refute it, especially because it is strongly in support of my position.

In 2 Timothy 3:15-17, Paul referred to Scripture that Timothy had available to him since childhood, which could only be referring to books the OT because none of the book of the NT had yet been written at the time of his childhood. Everything spoken by God being profitable for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness that the man of God may be complete, throughly equipped to do every good work all refers to a code of conduct and the code of conduct in the OT is the Mosaic Law, so that is primarily what Paul was referring to as being profitable for those things, which again is strongly in support of my position. If the OP were correct, then the Books of Moses would not be profitable for those things, so the OP is against 2 Timothy 3:16-17.

Is this an argument to agree or disagree with the quoted point in the Argument?

I see no point in the Argument suggesting a Christian is to emulate sin.

The OP is in favor of following Israel's example of disobedience to the Mosaic Law instead of learning from their example of disobedience what we should avoid doing in accordance with 1 Corinthians 10:1-13. It is by the Mosaic Law that we have knowledge of sin (Romans 3:20), so the OP is arguing for the freedom to do what God has revealed to be sin.

Lengthy Argument. Lengthy response. I'll not be writing lengthy, unless I do.

Feel free to respond to just what stands out to you.

 

[GDL]

The only way to become someone who has a character trait is through faith that we ought to become someone who practices it apart from being required to have practiced it a certain amount first as though it could be earned as a wage. To become someone who has a character trait means to become someone who practices that trait and it is contradictory to become someone who has a character trait apart from becoming someone who practices it.

So the only way for someone who is courageous is through faith that they ought to become someone who practices courageousness apart from being required to have practiced it a certain amount first as through it could be earned as a wage. To become courageous means to become someone who practices courageousness and it is contradictory for to become someone who is courageous apart from becoming someone who practices courageousness.

The same is true of any other character trait, including righteousness. The Mosaic Law is God's instructions for how to practice righteousness, not for how to become someone who is righteous. For example, the Mosaic Law reveals that helping the poor is a way to practice righteousness, but no amount of helping the poor will ever cause someone to become righteous because the only way to become righteous is through faith. So when God declares us to be righteous through faith that means that He is declaring us to be someone who practices righteousness by the same faith. In Isaiah 51:7, the righteous are those on whose heart is the Mosaic Law.

Doe everyone who has the character trait of not being murderous:

• Have faith in God?
• Have faith that we ought not to murder?
  • What does "ought" mean? What is the "ought"? Where does it come from? Why "ought"?
• Is there no reality of developing such a trait (becoming non-murderous) because it is required of the society one is part of and in order to avoid the penalty of a societal law?

Mosaic Law:

• Earlier you said "instructions for how to practice righteousness are not made to teach the righteous because the righteous are already following them"
  • Here you say the Mosaic Law is God's instructions for how to practice righteousness.
    • Why do the righteous need the Mosaic Law?
• I've seen you many times say, Christ is the goal of the Mosaic Law.
  • If Christ is the goal of the Mosaic Law, and if we believe in Christ for righteousness, then is not the Mosaic Law instruction on how to become righteous by faith?
  • If Christ is the goal of the Mosaic Law, then once we come to Christ, do we need the Mosaic Law?

Today the righteous are those who believe in Jesus Christ for righteousness (Gal2:16), whose heart is Jesus Christ (Acts8:37; Rom10:9-10), and who obey Him for Salvation (Heb5:9). The goal of the Mosaic Law was reached.

 

[Leaf473]

This does not mean that we're not under any Law in this NC era...

We definitely agree there. God doesn't write the entire law of Moses on our hearts. God does write his "Torah" in the sense of "way" or "path", yes. That's what we read in the post-Resurrection New Testament teaching.

(If someone wants to say that God writes the Ten Commandments in our hearts, my first question is: in what language? English?)

 

[GDL]

I have made no argument that refutes 2 Timothy 3:16-17 primarily because I have no desire to refute it, especially because it is strongly in support of my position.

In 2 Timothy 3:15-17, Paul referred to Scripture that Timothy had available to him since childhood, which could only be referring to books the OT because none of the book of the NT had yet been written at the time of his childhood. Everything spoken by God being profitable for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness that the man of God may be complete, throughly equipped to do every good work all refers to a code of conduct and the code of conduct in the OT is the Mosaic Law, so that is primarily what Paul was referring to as being profitable for those things, which again is strongly in support of my position. If the OP were correct, then the Books of Moses would not be profitable for those things, so the OP is against 2 Timothy 3:16-17.

Here's the way I read your words:

1. Whoever does righteousness is righteous just as He is righteous. 1John3:7
   1. "so instructions for how to practice righteousness are not made to teach the righteous because the righteous are already following them"
      1. My questions & observations:
         1. But Paul says the Mosaic Law (OC Scripture) is instruction in righteousness (2Tim3:16-17):
            1. And you say such instruction is not made for the righteous
            2. Then you say such instruction is a code of conduct that is profitable for us.
               1. So, if the righteous are already following the instruction and the instruction is not made for them, then why do they need the instruction and why is it profitable for them?

The OP is in favor of following Israel's example of disobedience to the Mosaic Law

Where does the OP say this?

Feel free to respond to just what stands out to you.

Thanks. Again, I'll probably be piecemeal today. Also, I know the OP was lengthy, but IMO lengthy follow-up discussions tend to get very confused as threads continue.

 

[GDL]

We definitely agree there. God doesn't write the entire law of Moses on our hearts.

3rd witness for this.

As you and I have briefly discussed elsewhere, I do however think there is something to be learned from all Mosaic Law as instruction in righteousness for the righteous and my sense is that it all tells us something about the mind of God - and thus about God.

 

[Doran]

I did not find even one text in your list that said the Old Covenant ended in 70 AD.

The OC went out of existence when the Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D., which also put an end forever to OC Judaism. The Temple, believe it or not, was the center of Judaism, it was at the core of every aspect of Jewish life, personal, religious, civil, cultural...everything, it was at the heart of he covenant relationship the people had with God on several different levels -- the main being that the temple was God's "house". It's where he dwelt among his COVENANT people. So, when temple was destroyed, that ended that covenant relationship. As the writer to Hebrews said about the OC, "and what IS obsolete and again will SOON disappear (Heb 8:13).

Jesus uses the Law of Moses - lawfully in Mark 7:6-13 and in Matt 19:16-19

Yes, because Jesus was born under the Law, don't you know (Gal 4:4)? But I wasn't. My wife wasn't. You weren't either. So...the passages you quote applied to Christ and to the Jews PRIOR to the Cross.

JUST as we see in James 2 and Rom 13 and Eph 6:1-2 and Romans 7


And Rom 3:19-20 says this is why all the world and EVERY Mouth is condemned to that very day.

19 Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; 20 because by the works of the Law none of mankind will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes knowledge of sin.'

No exceptions.. for as Rom 3:23 says "ALL have sinned"


All born again saints in OT and in NT are released from the Old Covenant of Rom 3:19-20 "obey and live" for they are saved by grace through faith. This explains how it is that Moses AND Elijah stand in glory WITH CHRIST in Matt 17 on the mount of transfiguration.

Gal 1:6-9 only ONE Gospel
Gal 3:8 that ONE Gospel was preached to Abraham

So then to this very day it is STILL a sin (even for Christians) to "Take God's name in vain" Ex 20:7

Well, then, Paul must have been very confused when he wrote 1 Timothy. Who are the righteous, if not God's saints, in 1Tim 1:9? You do know that there are two kinds of people in this world, right: saints and sinners, the righteous and unrighteous, the forgiven and unforgiven, the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent, the children of God and the children of the devil, lumps of clay for noble use and lumps for ignoble use? According to what you just wrote above, you seem to be lumping all people (including born again Christians) in the categories of "lawbreakers and rebels", the "ungodly and sinful", the "unholy and profane". (1Tim 1:9). If so, you are treading on very dangerous ground, for it does not please God for anyone to call Good Evil or Evil Good (Isa 5:20). Yet, you appear to be doing this very thing with the righteous saints who have been "washed", who have been "sanctified " and who have been "justified". It appears that you do not understand Christ's redemptive cross work at all! Don't you realize that Christ died for ALL the sins of God's elect (Col 2:13)?

And one more thing: On judgement day, none of us will be judged by the Mosaic Law! NONE of us! Rather, we'll all be judged by the Law of Christ (Jn 12:48-50). And don't think for a moment that Christ's words are limited to just the four Gospels! Fat chance! The entire NT is the "Law of Christ" (Jn 16:12-14). Jesus, during his first advent, did not teach on all the aspects of the Gospel, which included, among other things, the relationship between the Old Covenant that he would fulfill and the New which he would usher in. This is why he said, "I have MUCH MORE to say..." And so he did after his ascension through the Holy Spirit to his apostles. His teaching is called NT revelation.

 

[Doran]

I guess this would include Jesus who is disqualified, since He taught often on the law of Moses i.e. greatest commandments and many other principles directly from the law of Moses as well as from the Ten Commandments. In most of the verses you quote it just says "law" and you are adding "Mosasic covenant" I would consider not doing that per the instructions of scripture Pro 30:5-6 and allow the scripture to interpret itself.

Wow! Awesome refutation of my syllogism. Yes, as I just explained to Bob, Jesus was born under the Law so he stuck teaching on the Mosaic Law up until the Cross. But AFTER the Cross -- then we come to the REST of Jesus' teaching. It's called the NT! But at that Cross a New Covenant was ratified in his own precious blood (as opposed to just the blood of animals under the Old Covenant), and this New Covenant is different in kind from the Old, and infinitely better. Not only that but the Old conflicts with the New, making them incompatible, which is why the Old finally ended in 70 A.D.

Now I see that you complain about my phrase "Mosaic Covenant". The Law (all of it!) came through Moses (Jn 1:17) and, yes, whether you like it or not the Law was given to Israel in the form of covenant (which is a legal treaty). This is an irrefutable fact. So...as the covenant goes...so GOES the Law! And this is what sticks in your craw, isn't it? It seems that you need to cling to the Mosaic Law because it demands that those under it DO things...and if you can just DO enough things for God, you can find something to boast of? God will find merit in your "doing" the Law? This is your way of contributing to or adding to Christ's FINISHED work on the Cross?

 

[Doran]

3rd witness for this.

As you and I have briefly discussed elsewhere, I do however think there is something to be learned from all Mosaic Law as instruction in righteousness for the righteous and my sense is that it all tells us something about the mind of God - and thus about God.

Absolutely! In fact, there is much that can be learned. The Law reveals the holiness, righteous and goodness of God for starters. And that's already saying a mouthful! To learn all about God's magnificent character. Plus there is much in the OT that can inform us what agape love looks like on a practical level. But these things are a far cry from being "under the Law" as a Rule of Life; for to be "under the law", this can only mean, "Do this and live"!

 

[SabbathBlessings]

The OC went out of existence when the Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D., which also put an end forever to OC Judaism. The Temple, believe it or not, was the center of Judaism, it was at the core of every aspect of Jewish life, personal, religious, civil, cultural...everything, it was at the heart of he covenant relationship the people had with God on several different levels -- the main being that the temple was God's "house". It's where he dwelt among his COVENANT people. So, when temple was destroyed, that ended that covenant relationship. As the writer to Hebrews said about the OC, "and what IS obsolete and again will SOON disappear (Heb 8:13).

There is nothing that says the New Covenant started in 70AD it was ratified by the blood of Jesus- It Is Finished John 19:30 This was the beginning of the New Covenant- Jesus was already teaching on the New Covenant as He came not only to replace animal sacrifices for sin as they always pointed to Him Heb 10:1-22 Col 2:14-17 KJV He came to show man how to live as the perfect example to follow 1 John 2:6

The earthy temple destruction doesn't mean anything because Jesus minsters from a heavenly Temple not made with humans' hands. Hebrews 8:2 The earthy temple was patterned after God's heavenly temple Hebrews 8:1-5 which was always there to teach the plan of salvation everything in the earthy temple in the courtyard and holy place was teaching us sanctification to lead us to the Most Holy place where lies the Ten Commandments which is what defines sin Romans 7:7 and what we will be Judged by according to scripture James 2:10-12 so the Ten Commandments didn't end at the cross or in 70AD as it is shown in God's heavenly Temple Rev 11:19 and represents God's law living in our hearts and minds and overcoming sin and His people being created in the character of God because His holy law represents His holy character and we are called to be holy like He is holy 1 Peter 1:15-16 which came from the Mosaic covenant. Leviticus 11:44 So not everything you claim to have ended, did, which is why they are being taught by Jesus and His followers all to be our example to follow.

Yes, because Jesus was born under the Law, don't you know (Gal 4:4)? But I wasn't. My wife wasn't. You weren't either. So...the passages you quote applied to Christ and to the Jews PRIOR to the Cross.

Well, then, Paul must have been very confused when he wrote 1 Timothy. Who are the righteous, if not God's saints, in 1Tim 1:9? You do know that there are two kinds of people in this world, right: saints and sinners, the righteous and unrighteous, the forgiven and unforgiven, the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent, the children of God and the children of the devil, lumps of clay for noble use and lumps for ignoble use? According to what you just wrote above, you seem to be lumping all people (including born again Christians) in the categories of "lawbreakers and rebels", the "ungodly and sinful", the "unholy and profane". (1Tim 1:9). If so, you are treading on very dangerous ground, for it does not please God for anyone to call Good Evil or Evil Good (Isa 5:20). Yet, you appear to be doing this very thing with the righteous saints who have been "washed", who have been "sanctified " and who have been "justified". It appears that you do not understand Christ's redemptive cross work at all! Don't you realize that Christ died for ALL the sins of God's elect (Col 2:13)?

And one more thing: On judgement day, none of us will be judged by the Mosaic Law! NONE of us! Rather, we'll all be judged by the Law of Christ (Jn 12:48-50). And don't think for a moment that Christ's words are limited to just the four Gospels! Fat chance! The entire NT is the "Law of Christ" (Jn 16:12-14). Jesus, during his first advent, did not teach on all the aspects of the Gospel, which included, among other things, the relationship between the Old Covenant that he would fulfill and the New which he would usher in. This is why he said, "I have MUCH MORE to say..." And so he did after his ascension through the Holy Spirit to his apostles. His teaching is called NT revelation.

John 12:44 Then Jesus cried out and said, “He who believes in Me, believes not in Me but in Him who sent Me. 45 And he who sees Me sees Him who sent Me. 46 I have come as a light into the world, that whoever believes in Me should not abide in darkness. 47 And if anyone hears My words and does not believe, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. 48 He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him—the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day. (Rev 22:14-15, Mat 7:21-23) 49 For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak. 50 And I know that His command is everlasting life. Therefore, whatever I speak, just as the Father has told Me, so I speak.”

This passage is about following God's Word, which is what we will be judged by and believing in His Word which would include Mat 15:3-9, Mat 5:19-30, Mat 19:17-19, John 14:15 Luke 4:16, John 15:10 James 2:10 and all of the testimonies of the prophets and disciples and every Word that proceeds from the mouth of God Mat 4:4.

 

[daq]

Hi, Folks

I have created a few biblical syllogisms that show that the Old Covenant, having been set aside, made obsolete and made to vanish forever in 70 A.D. was ordained for this destiny because it was antithetical to the eternal eternal the New Covenant that supersedes it. Eventually, I'll post all three syllogisms in this thread. But in the syllogism below, I approach the Mosaic Law from a different angle --from the perspective of 1Tim 1:8 that makes the Mosaic Law good on the condition that one uses it lawfully.

For anyone who is unfamiliar with the syllogistic method to making logical conclusions, a syllogism consists of a major premise and any number minor premises that are closely related to each other, and then finally to the grand finale, as it were -- the logical conclusion itself. In order to falsify a syllogism one would need to invalidate at least one of the premises in the chain of premises. The following syllogism consists of one major premise and 10 minor ones. I have named this one:

The Unlawful Use of the Law of Moses​

The Mosaic Law is good if it's used lawfully (1Tim 1:8)

The Mosaic Law was made for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners and for the unholy and profane such as described in 1Tim 1:9-11; 1Cor 6:9-11; Rom 1:21-32; Gal 5:19-21; Col 3:5-9; 2Pet 2:10-22; Mk 7:21-23; Rev 22:15, etc.;

And Israel's transgressions are the quintessential example of why God added the Law Covenant(Gal 3:19);

Conversely, all God's elect are considered by God to be righteous in his sight and no longer subject to the Mosaic Law Covenant (1Tim 1:9)

And righteousness is defined in various ways in the NT to mean, among other things, "to be washed" (1Cor 6:11), and this washing was through the new birth" (Tit 3:5); and it also means to be washed through the blood of the Lamb (Rev 7:14).

Additionally, righteousness is also defined as being sanctified (1Cor 6:11); and this means to be sanctified by faith (Act 26:18); to be in Christ (1Cor 1:30; Heb 2:11), and to be sanctified by the Spirit (1Pet 1:2);

Also, righteousness is defined as God justifying the ungodly by imputing Christ's righteousness to all his elect (Rom 8:30), and Christ himself justifies the elect (Isa 53:11) by his own shed blood (Rom 5:9); and we're justified solely by faith (Act 13:39; Gal 2:16; 3:11), which is actually contrary to the Mosiac Law (Gal 3:12).

This does not mean that we're not under any Law in this NC era , even though Christ is the end of the Law for all believers (Rom 10:4); for we are under a different law the Law of Christ (Isa 42:4, 21, 24; 1Cor 9:21; Gal 6:2; 2Jn 9), which also goes by other names, e.g.the Law of Liberty (Jas 1:25: 2:12); Perfect Law (Jas 2:12); The Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ (Rom 8:2) and the Law of Faith (Rom 3:27);

But what these truths do imply is that in this New Covenant age, the Law of Christ, by any of its names, is antithetical to the Mosaic Law Covenant, since it is the Gospel and the Law of Christ that determine what is lawful and what is not in this age, for God commands his NC people to listen to His son (Deut 18:15; Mat 17:5; Heb 1:1-2), as did Christ himself command (Mat 28:20; Jn 16:12-14);

And these truths also imply that the Law of Moses and the Law of Christ cannot possibly be one and the same Law, otherwise no Christian would be under any law whatsoever, which would result in the apostle Paul contradicting himself twice over (1Cor 9:21; Gal 6:2), also contradicting Peter (1 Pet 1:2) and contradicting Christ himself (Lk 6:47; Mat 28:20).

And the Law of Liberty (Jas 1:25) cannot be one and the same as the Mosaic Law, for the former is truth which sets us free from the law of sin and death (Rom 8:2; Jn 8:32), while the later can only enslave us to sin, for it is the power of sin (1Cor 15:56) since it arouses sinful passions in us (Rom 7:5).

Therefore, because all true believers are righteous in God's eyes, having been washed, sanctified and justified by God through Christ and by the Holy Spirit, it is UNLAWFUL, according to the Law of Christ, for any Christian to place him or herself under the Mosaic Law Covenant that was set aside (Heb 10:9), became obsolete and disappeared forever in 70 A.D. (Heb 8:13) for any reason; and it is equally unlawful for any professing Christian to attempt to bind the conscience of another believer or truth-seeker by persuading them that the Mosaic Law Covenant either sanctifies them through their obedience or that the Old Covenant is still the primary Rule of Conduct for Living in this New Covenant dispensation. Paul pronounced a curse (twice over!) on those who wanted to exalt the Mosaic Law over Gospel Truth, thereby perverting it (Gal 1:6-9)! And Christ himself pronounced a "woe" on all who would cause one of his own to stumble (Lk 17:1-2). This is how serious an error Legalism is. There are indeed lawful uses for the Mosaic Law but none of them are what I have just stated in this paragraph.

All points based on what it means to be "washed", "saved", "born from above", "sanctified", etc., are irrelevant if one makes such a case and yet does not fully comprehend the teachings of such concepts and doctrines in the Apostolic writings.

Hebrews 10:35-39 KJV
35 Cast not away therefore your confidence, which hath great recompence of reward.
36 For ye have need of patience, that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise.
37 For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry.
38 Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.
39 But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.

There is therefore a time of testing to come when we enter into the faith: it is not "salvation" based on a one time confession of faith or so-called sinner's prayer. This time of testing is noted by Paul in Galatians 4:1-2 and is a time appointed of the Father when a babe or child becomes a tried, true, and tested son.

Galatians 4:1-2 KJV
1 Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all;
2 But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.

So then, according to Paul, until the time appointed of the Father has come, every babe or child in Meshiah is under a schoolmaster, (Gal 3:24), tutors, and governors, which is to say, Torah, Prophets, and Writings, (the whole Tanakh body of scripture). One cannot "use the law lawfully" while knowing nothing about it or not understanding it.

 

[GDL]

There is nothing that says the New Covenant started in 70AD

Where do you see any of us saying it started in AD70?

I think if you read more closely, you'll see there was an overlap period between the death & resurrection of Jesus Christ and AD70 when He destroyed the entire Mosaic System. Scripture often works, especially in Prophecy, with an already & not yet reality.

The earthy temple destruction doesn't mean anything

It meant something to Jesus who said it would take place (and at least one system of Eschatology sees Him as the final destroyer of the Old in AD70) and it has tremendous meaning in destruction of the Old and actual implementation of the New.

 

[GDL]

All points based on what it means to be "washed", "saved", "born from above", "sanctified", etc., are irrelevant if one makes such a case and yet does not fully comprehend the teachings of such concepts and doctrines in the Apostolic writings.

You, for one thing, are ripping Gal4:1-2 out of its context which is speaking of being under Law until Christ came. The infancy was Israel under Law before Christ came and redeemed them.

 

[Soyeong]

Doe everyone who has the character trait of not being murderous:

• Have faith in God?
• Have faith that we ought not to murder?
  • What does "ought" mean? What is the "ought"? Where does it come from? Why "ought"?
• Is there no reality of developing such a trait (becoming non-murderous) because it is required of the society one is part of and in order to avoid the penalty of a societal law?

Our works express what we believe, which is why James 2:17-18 says that works without faith are dead and that he would show his faith by his works, so everyone who is doing the same works as James has the same faith as him, so yes and yes.

Morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to obey God because He is sovereign, so all of God's laws are inherently moral laws. Likewise, morality is based on God's nature and "ought" refers to having a moral obligation to act in accordance with God's nature. Every legislator gives laws according to what they think ought to be done, so the extent that a society gives laws that correspond to what God thinks ought to be done is the extent that they are teaching to believe in God. For example, by doing good works in obedience to God's law we are testifying about God's goodness, which is why our good works give glory to Him (Matthew 5:16), and which is also expressing the belief that God is good, or in other words, doing good works is the way to believe in or have faith in God.

Mosaic Law:

• Earlier you said "instructions for how to practice righteousness are not made to teach the righteous because the righteous are already following them"
  • Here you say the Mosaic Law is God's instructions for how to practice righteousness.
    • Why do the righteous need the Mosaic Law?
• I've seen you many times say, Christ is the goal of the Mosaic Law.
  • If Christ is the goal of the Mosaic Law, and if we believe in Christ for righteousness, then is not the Mosaic Law instruction on how to become righteous by faith?
  • If Christ is the goal of the Mosaic Law, then once we come to Christ, do we need the Mosaic Law?

The Bible often uses the same traits to describe aspects of God's nature as it does to describe aspects of the nature of God's law, such as with it being holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12), or with justice, mercy, and faithfulness being weightier matters of the Mosaic Law (Matthew 23:23) which is because it is God's instructions for how to testify about or practice those aspects of God's nature. Someone needs to be taught how practice those traits before they can practice them and someone who is practicing them through faith means that they they are someone who has those traits. If someone is practicing righteousness, then they do not need the Mosaic Law in order to teach them how to do that because they already know how to do that, but that doesn't mean that they no longer need to live in accordance with what it teaches.

The Son is the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15) and the radiance of God's glory and exact image of God's nature (Hebrews 1:3), so if all of the invisible traits that the Mosaic Law was given to teach us how to practice were personified into a body that we can see, then that would be Jesus. Believing that we ought to be someone who practices the Son's traits by following his example of obedience to the Mosaic Law is the way to believe in and know the Son. In other words, believing that we ought to be someone who practices Christ's righteousness in obedience to the Mosaic Law is the way to believe in Christ for righteousness. It is not the case that we need to obey the Mosaic Law first and then we will become righteous as the result as if it were earned as a wage, but rather the only way to become someone who has a character trait is through faith. The Mosaic Law teaches us how to have faith (Matthew 23:23) and it is by that faith that we are declared righteous, not earned through a wage. Us obeying to the Mosaic Law is about God giving us a gift not about us earning a wage from God (Psalms 119:29-30).

Knowing Christ is the goal of the Mosaic Law, so it is teaching us how to have an intimate relationship with him through acting in accordance with his nature, and it would be working at cross purposes for someone to abandon God's instructions for how to have a relationship with Christ after they have come into a relationship with Him.

Today the righteous are those who believe in Jesus Christ for righteousness (Gal2:16), whose heart is Jesus Christ (Acts8:37; Rom10:9-10), and who obey Him for Salvation (Heb5:9). The goal of the Mosaic Law reached.

Indeed, and the Mosaic Law is God's instructions for how to believe in Christ for righteousness, not for how to earn righteousness as a wage. Growing in a relationship with Christ is something that we do throughout the rest of our lives, not something that we reject once we have a relationship with Him.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Where do you see any of us saying in started in AD70?

I think if you read more closely, you'll see there was an overlap period between the death & resurrection of Jesus Christ and AD70 when He destroyed the entire Mosaic System. Scripture often works, especially in Prophecy, with an already & not yet reality.

What do you define as the entire Mosaic system? And where is the verse that says because of the destruction of the earthy temple we can disregard all of the teachings of Moses and Jesus who taught on Moses.

Previously you stated that included the Ten Commandments, but that certainly does not reconcile with the teachings of Jesus Mat 5:19-30, Mat 15:3-9, Mat 19:17-19 etc. or what will happen at the end of time Mat 7:21-23 Rev 22:14-15

This is what Jesus said about the destruction of the earthy temple...

Jesus answered and said to them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” John 2:19 He was speaking of His body. We are also called to be temples of the Holy Spirit which is why we are to keep our bodies clean health wise and free of sin (Rom 7:7) 1 Corinthians 6:19-20

It meant something to Jesus who said it would take place (and at least one system of Eschatology that see Him as the final destroyer of the Old) and it has tremendous meaning in destruction of the Old and actual implementation of the New.

The earthy temple was always a shadow or miniature of the heavenly Temple Heb 8:1-5, which is where Jesus minsters from, yes Jesus predicted the destruction of the earthy temple, but it always pointed to something much greater. Because it was destroyed doesn't mean we can add scripture we don't want to follow along with it, when God's Word simple doesn't teach this. Personally, this seems like a very bad idea.