If you Love Me - KEEP My Commandments

[bugkiller]

Perhaps Paul personally kept the OT law his whole life, but that is not what he taught others to do. I think that you will agree that circumcision is a requirement of the OT Law. Here are some things that Paul taught about circumcision:

Galatians 5:2
Now I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. rsv​

1 Corinthians 7:18
Was any one at the time of his call already circumcised? Let him not seek to remove the marks of circumcision. Was any one at the time of his call uncircumcised? Let him not seek circumcision. rsv

1 Corinthians 7:19
For neither circumcision counts for anything nor uncircumcision, but keeping the commandments of God. rsv
​

The Old Covenant Circumcision Ritual is no longer a commandment of God for the New Covenant Christian.

​

They just do not understand or accept the word "new" as found in Jer 31.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

Bob you say you don't know of any prophecy that does away with Torah. You mentioned in a previous posts that you don't know of any scripture that states the Torah is divided into moral and ceremonial laws.

Paul is hard to understand Peter even gave a disclaimer when reading Pauls writings.

2 Peter3:15-17
5 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, there are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability.

I don't want to see you carried away with the error of lawless people. Satan has lied from the beginning trying to keep people from following God.

The spirit is not contrary to the law the flesh is.

The law is spiritual and Holy and right and good. Romans 7:12.

Oh my could I be banned for posting the truth here?

bugkiller

 

[Jan001]

So you believe that we are only commanded to keep the last 5 commandments?

I answered a specific post.

God must be first. Anything that interferes with our relationship with God is a form of idolatry. Love of money, children, spouse, or anything else can become a person's idol.

Every day is God's day. Every thing we do every day should give honor and glory to God.

Romans 14:5-7
One man esteems one day as better than another, while another man esteems all days alike. Let every one be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. He also who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God; while he who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 None of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. rsv​

Anything that is harmful to ourselves we are forbidden to do. Anything that is harmful to our neighbor we are forbidden to do.

Obedience to God in all things is what we should do. God's commandments are not limited to five specific commands.

 

[Bob S]

I answered a specific post.

God must be first. Anything that interferes with our relationship with God is a form of idolatry. Love of money, children, spouse, or anything else can become a person's idol.

Every day is God's day. Every thing we do every day should give honor and glory to God.

Romans 14:5-7
One man esteems one day as better than another, while another man esteems all days alike. Let every one be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. He also who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God; while he who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 None of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. rsv​

Anything that is harmful to ourselves we are forbidden to do. Anything that is harmful to our neighbor we are forbidden to do.

Obedience to God in all things is what we should do. God's commandments are not limited to five specific commands.

Amen Jan. Love is the theme of the New Testament. Why would anyone need to apply themselves to ritual laws given only to Israel and are now defunct.

 

[Travis93]

Perhaps Paul personally kept the OT law his whole life, but that is not what he taught others to do. I think that you will agree that circumcision is a requirement of the OT Law. Here are some things that Paul taught about circumcision:

Galatians 5:2
Now I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. rsv​

1 Corinthians 7:18
Was any one at the time of his call already circumcised? Let him not seek to remove the marks of circumcision. Was any one at the time of his call uncircumcised? Let him not seek circumcision. rsv

1 Corinthians 7:19
For neither circumcision counts for anything nor uncircumcision, but keeping the commandments of God. rsv
​

The Old Covenant Circumcision Ritual is no longer a commandment of God for the New Covenant Christian.

​

Then is Paul a hypocrite? Do as I say, not as I do? I thought he said to imitate him in 1 Corinthians 11:1. And if he really thought circumcision makes Christ of none effect, did he cause Timotheus to lose his salvation in Acts 16:1-3?

 

[Jan001]

Then is Paul a hypocrite? Do as I say, not as I do? I thought he said to imitate him in 1 Corinthians 11:1. And if he really thought circumcision makes Christ of none effect, did he cause Timotheus to lose his salvation in Acts 16:1-3?

I don't think that Paul was a hypocrite because his intention for doing it was good according to his own reasoning. I am not saying that it was a wise thing for him to do.

Acts 16:1=5
And he came also to Derbe and to Lystra. A disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer; but his father was a Greek. 2 He was well spoken of by the brethren at Lystra and Ico′nium. 3 Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him; and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews that were in those places, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. 4 As they went on their way through the cities, they delivered to them for observance the decisions which had been reached by the apostles and elders who were at Jerusalem. 5 So the churches were strengthened in the faith, and they increased in numbers daily. rsv
​

Circumcision saves no one. Paul did not circumcise Timothy in order to save him and Timothy knew that Paul did not circumcise him in order to save him. Timothy did not lose his salvation because he never believed that circumcision was necessary to save him. Today, some Christian parents have their sons circumcised, but they do not believe that circumcision has anything to do with salvation. Instead, they do it because they believe it will help prevent infections.

1 Corinthians 7:19
For neither circumcision counts for anything nor uncircumcision, but keeping the commandments of God. rsv

Galatians 5:6
For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love. rsv
​

So why was Timothy circumcised?
Before Jesus came to earth, the Jews did not associate with non-Jews.

John 4:9
The Samaritan woman said to him, “How is it that you, a Jew, ask a drink of me, a woman of Samar′ia?” For Jews have no dealings with Samaritans. rsv
​

Timothy agreed to be circumcised so that the Jews would not take offense against his presence among them. They all knew that his father was a Greek. Some of the Jews in these places were contentious and Paul wanted to avoid stirring up these men so that they would listen to the gospel and be truly converted to Christianity.

1 Corinthians 9:19-23
For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, that I might win the more. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews; to those under the law I became as one under the law—though not being myself under the law—that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law—not being without law toward God but under the law of Christ—that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. 23 I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings. rsv
​

Paul thought he had a valid reason for circumcising Timothy. The early church had many problems with some Jewish converts to Christianity. They refused to agree with the apostles' teaching about circumcision and also other things. These Jews (Judaizers) insisted that the non-Jew converts to Christianity become circumcised in order to be Christians. Perhaps Paul would not have circumcised Timothy if he had known just how stubborn some of these men would become.

Titus 1:7-11
For a bishop, as God’s steward, must be blameless; he must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, 8 but hospitable, a lover of goodness, master of himself, upright, holy, and self-controlled; 9 he must hold firm to the sure word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to confute those who contradict it. 10 For there are many insubordinate men, empty talkers and deceivers, especially the circumcision party; 11 they must be silenced, since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for base gain what they have no right to teach. rsv​

​

​

 

[Bob S]

I don't think that Paul was a hypocrite because his intention for doing it was good according to his own reasoning. I am not saying that it was a wise thing for him to do.

​

I proved to Travis that all but one of the scriptures he used to tell us Paul was still under Torah was false or a stretch. One time Paul wrote that he was going to a feast . Why he went of course we are not privy to. Travis has an agenda and nothing we prove stops this agenda. Once a person becomes indoctrinated by the law enforcing groups it is neigh impossible to reason with them. I am here for those who are trying to make up their minds, those who lurk.

 

[Jan001]

I proved to Travis that all but one of the scriptures he used to tell us Paul was still under Torah was false or a stretch. One time Paul wrote that he was going to a feast . Why he went of course we are not privy to. Travis has an agenda and nothing we prove stops this agenda. Once a person becomes indoctrinated by the law enforcing groups it is neigh impossible to reason with them. I am here for those who are trying to make up their minds, those who lurk.

My brother is one of the "we all must be under the law" adherents so I understand what you mean.

Christians have feasts. One such example is Pentecost. Christians do not celebrate Pentecost in the same manner as the Jews celebrate it or for the same reason they celebrate it.

Pentecost is a Greek word which means 50. Christians celebrate Pentecost as the birthday of the Church because exactly 50 days after the resurrection, the Holy Spirit descended upon and empowered the apostles to "go out and baptize people in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit to make disciples for Jesus Christ and to teach these disciples to do all that Jesus commanded." Acts 1:4, Matthew 28:18-20

Christians are definitely not under the Law of Moses.

Romans 6:15
What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! nkjv​

Galatians 5:18
But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. nkjv

1 Corinthians 9:19-21
For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, that I might win the more. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews; to those under the law I became as one under the law—though not being myself under the law—that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law—not being without law toward God but under the law of Christ—that I might win those outside the law. rsv
​

Paul specifically states that he is not under the law.
For a translation of the Greek words used in this passage, check out the MOUNCE translation. I don't see how any person can legitimately misunderstand Paul's teaching if they study all the Scripture passages concerning this topic instead of just choosing a few which they think support their own agenda.

​

 

[Bob S]

Brainwashing is a terrible thing to allow to happen. It stifles the ability to gain new understanding. The mind becomes completely closed to anything except what someone had instilled. Only the power of the Holy Spirit can contend with this dilemma.

I can personally testify of this because I too was once so blinded that I denied all that others and scripture bore. All the scripture that pointed to salvation by faith without the works of the law was superseded by old covenant laws meant for Israel only. What a shame it is that I lost all of those years trying to please God when He didn't require or want me to live by laws that were superseded by the Royal Law of Love.

 

[Cribstyl]

Then is Paul a hypocrite? Do as I say, not as I do? I thought he said to imitate him in 1 Corinthians 11:1. And if he really thought circumcision makes Christ of none effect, did he cause Timotheus to lose his salvation in Acts 16:1-3?

Who is the hypocrite Travis93? You've been given explanations to why Paul caused Timothy to be circumcised.
Maybe you should explain what the Jerusalem council concluded about those people who went to the Gentiles saying you must be circumcised and keep the law.

Act 15:23 And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia:
Act 15:24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:

 

[Cribstyl]

Brainwashing is a terrible thing to allow to happen. It stifles the ability to gain new understanding. The mind becomes completely closed to anything except what someone had instilled. Only the power of the Holy Spirit can contend with this dilemma.

I can personally testify of this because I too was once so blinded that I denied all that others and scripture bore. All the scripture that pointed to salvation by faith without the works of the law was superseded by old covenant laws meant for Israel only. What a shame it is that I lost all of those years trying to please God when He didn't require or want me to live by laws that were superseded by the Royal Law of Love.

Well spoken and true. I' bet you will see the same old questions and false arguments in the next thread.

 

[Travis93]

If Paul led people to not follow the law, he must be rejected as a false prophet (Deuteronomy 13:1-5). The law cannot be added to or detracted from (Deuteronomy 4:2, Deuteronomy 12:32). One who doesn't have the law has no light in them (Isaiah 8:20). Jesus himself affirmed the need to follow the law (Matthew 5:17-19, Luke 16:17, Matthew 23:2-3), he is in no way suspect. But Paul must be carefully judged as to whether he was in favor of the law and trustworthy, or no.

 

[Cribstyl]

If Paul led people to not follow the law, he must be rejected as a false prophet (Deuteronomy 13:1-5). The law cannot be added to or detracted from (Deuteronomy 4:2, Deuteronomy 12:32). One who doesn't have the law has no light in them (Isaiah 8:20). Jesus himself affirmed the need to follow the law (Matthew 5:17-19, Luke 16:17, Matthew 23:2-3), he is in no way suspect. But Paul must be carefully judged as to whether he was in favor of the law and trustworthy, or no.

Do you get that opinion from the letters Paul wrote? Have you read what Luke wrote about Paul, from his transformation to the end of his ministry? Why did he teach that we're not under the law?

 

[Travis93]

Do you get that opinion from the letters Paul wrote? Have you read what Luke wrote about Paul, from his transformation to the end of his ministry? Why did he teach that we're not under the law?

I have read the whole Bible front to back. As soon as the law was established, God said not to change it. Prophet after prophet was sent telling them to stopping breaking the law. I cannot accept that it would be done away with. That would mean for over a thousand years God had a law that was pointless, then decided it was flawed and did away with it. On top of that, it would mean he told people not to follow those who go against the law, and then raised a prophet to do just that. It would invalidate several prophesies such as the whole world coming to learn the law (Isaiah 2:2-3, Micah 4:2-3) and the continuing observance of the feasts (Zechariah 14:16, Ezekiel 46:3). I now understand why most Jews have rejected Christianity for almost 2000 years, they are following the commandment of God (Deuteronomy 13:1-5).

 

[bbbbbbb]

I have read the whole Bible front to back. As soon as the law was established, God said not to change it. Prophet after prophet was sent telling them to stopping breaking the law. I cannot accept that it would be done away with. That would mean for over a thousand years God had a law that was pointless, then decided it was flawed and did away with it. On top of that, it would mean he told people not to follow those who go against the law, and then raised a prophet to do just that. It would invalidate several prophesies such as the whole world coming to learn the law (Isaiah 2:2-3, Micah 4:2-3) and the continuing observance of the feasts (Zechariah 14:16, Ezekiel 46:3). I now understand why most Jews have rejected Christianity for almost 2000 years, they are following the commandment of God (Deuteronomy 13:1-5).

Of course sincere Jews believe in justification through Law-keeping, and always have. If one takes the New Testament seriously one understands that it does not present another prophet calling folks back to the yoke of the Law for justification in the sight of a perfect and holy God. Rather, it gives us the radical fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies in the person and work of Jesus Christ who not only was the sole person to perfectly keep the Law, but shed His blood as a propitiation for our sins, dying so that we might be justified through faith in Him.

Christianity is not Reform Judaism. Christianity is radically different, make no mistake about it.

 

[bugkiller]

I have read the whole Bible front to back. As soon as the law was established, God said not to change it. Prophet after prophet was sent telling them to stopping breaking the law. I cannot accept that it would be done away with. That would mean for over a thousand years God had a law that was pointless, then decided it was flawed and did away with it. On top of that, it would mean he told people not to follow those who go against the law, and then raised a prophet to do just that. It would invalidate several prophesies such as the whole world coming to learn the law (Isaiah 2:2-3, Micah 4:2-3) and the continuing observance of the feasts (Zechariah 14:16, Ezekiel 46:3). I now understand why most Jews have rejected Christianity for almost 2000 years, they are following the commandment of God (Deuteronomy 13:1-5).

Then you reject Jeremiah.

bugkiller

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Obedience to God in all things is what we should do.

COOL! This also follows directly from
"bringing all things (every thought, every imagination, every action)
into subjection to Jesus".

How many times does someone need reminded that God always knows best ?!

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I now understand why most Jews have rejected Christianity for almost 2000 years, they are following the commandment of God (Deuteronomy 13:1-5).

Yes,
and remember Richard Wurmbrand (who perhaps you're already aware of),
as
He said basically the same thing - when someone presented a falst gospel to him, he rejected it naturally, in obedience to God's Word,
then
when an old man in the mountains in Switzerland(I think)
told him the Truth from all Scripture (OT and NT)
about Messiah Yeshua,
Richard Wurmbrand readily agreed and believed Jesus is Messiah and
willingly allowed Jesus to "draw him under His Wings" - to heal and save him and thereafter Richard was trained and orchestrated(led and directed) by Jesus
preached the true Gospel of Jesus to many others !

 

[Travis93]

Then you reject Jeremiah.

bugkiller

I reject your interpretation of it. I see Jeremiah's new covenant as being with the house of Israel and Judah only, not unconverted gentiles, and I see the law being written on their heart, not being abolished. Here's a parallel prophesy from Ezekiel.
Ezekiel 36:26-27 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

Does this sound like abolishing the law to you?

 

[bugkiller]

I reject your interpretation of it. I see Jeremiah's new covenant as being with the house of Israel and Judah only, not unconverted gentiles, and I see the law being written on their heart, not being abolished. Here's a parallel prophesy from Ezekiel.
Ezekiel 36:26-27 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

Does this sound like abolishing the law to you?

What does "not according to " mean? To me it means something different.

bugkiller